Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

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

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

Shortcuts

XFD backlog
v
t
e
V	Aug	Sep	Total
CfD	1	53	54
TfD	1	23	24
MfD	0	2	2
FfD	1	15	16
RfD	0	51	51
AfD	0	7	7

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

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

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

Before listing a redirect for discussion

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

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

The guiding principles of RfD

Shortcut

WP:RGUIDEWP:RGUIDE

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

When to delete a redirect

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

Shortcuts

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

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

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

Reasons for deleting

Shortcut

WP:RFD#DELETEWP:RFD#DELETE

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

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

STEP II.

List the entry on RfD.

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

Enter this text below the date heading:

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

~~~~

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

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

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

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

~~~~

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

STEP III.

Notify users.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Current list

Shortcuts

October 4

Note this nomination is mainly regarding where to target, rather than deleting. This redirects to Walt Disney Pictures. However, it appears that the term "Disney Live Action" is mainly used as of now to refer live action remakes. Disney Live Action Remakes exists as a redirect. RanDom 404 (talk) 17:19, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Disney Live Action Remakes redirects to List of remakes and adaptations of Disney animated films, which is fine. However, I disagree with redirecting Disney Live Action to the same target, given that Disney makes many live action films that are not remakes (e.g., the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise). Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:34, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget → List of remakes and adaptations of Disney animated films. This appears to be the primary topic. We don't have a list of all live action Disney films that includes remakes and non-remakes. We have numerous Disney lists including List of Walt Disney Pictures films and the list of lists Lists of Walt Disney Studios films. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:07, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ras v12

Ras v12 → Gene (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Does not appear to be mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:32, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Ras GTPase. It is mentioned there in prose, under the subheading Ras GTPase#Ras-targeted cancer treatments. The Ras mutations in the 12th residue position inhibit the bound of the regulatory GAP molecule to the mutated Ras, causing uncontrolled cell growth. Notably, the claim is currently unsourced but I see some cursory Google Scholar hits that would be relevant. TNstingray (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:08, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The term isn't used nor described at Ras GTPase. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:21, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is patently false per my suggestion to retarget. Ras^V12 is how it is written in the literature, such as this link I found via Google Scholar [2]. It may not be exactly spelled out with the superscript in the article, but that is a simple fix, and it is also clearly described in prose per the green text I previously provided. TNstingray (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I said the term is not used nor described. Readers who are already familiar with the term may find the brief mention in this >2,500 word article and be able to determine its meaning. Most won't and sending readers there is more likely to confuse and potentially mislead. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:56, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:06, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Team Cherry (developer)

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

There has been discussion in the past about whether this should be a separate article or just a redirect to hollow knight. With the release of Hollow knight Silksong the redirect does not make sense anymore since the developer has released multiple games.

The Hollow knight article contains virtually no information about the developer and people have shown interest in creating an actual article for this redirect so I suggest deleting it per WP:RETURNTORED Parcynthia (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's a believable redirect, and there's no evidence they pass WP:NCORP. If they do, the article can easily be unredirected, but we also don't want to encourage people to create an article when it's not notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:13, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:08, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was a believable redirect until hollow knight silksong was released. The wikipedia page for silksong now at a glance contains a similar amount, if not slightly more, information about team cherry. Redirecting to either of the games when both are similar in size/popularity/information seems wrong to me. From my pov they barely manage to pass NCORP but if they don't then salting the article makes more sense than arbitrarily redirecting to half their work. However I am not that well versed in Wikipedia policy and am okay with whatever ends up happening. Parcynthia (talk) 21:20, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this gets kept, I think it should be moved to Team Cherry per ONEOTHER. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Team Cherry per QuietHere. मल्ल (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:06, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson: History

Michael Jackson: History → Michael Jackson#Life and career (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Lean delete. This is not a standard article title format and is an implausible search string for biographical information. It is ambiguous with the Michael Jackson album HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I, commonly abbreviated HIStory. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:56, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete It was originally a vandalism page and one of only three vandalism edits by its author. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:02, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As the nominator stated, it's a highly implausible search term due to its formatting; it also strangely uses "History" to refer to the biography of a person; if the redirect was "Michael Jackson: Life" or "Michael Jackson: Biography" it would make more sense and I would lean keep but this isn't the case. The page history is also irrelevant as it was a single edit vandal page before being turned into a redirect. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:30, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per Thepharoah, would've probably qualified for G1 in it's original form, or at least been close. also, it is potentially confusable with Michael Jackson: Revision history in addition to the previously mentioned HIStory. Oreocooke (talk) 21:25, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the album Sting Kipu (talk) 22:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this is going to redirect anywhere then the album commonly known as HIStory is by far the most plausible target. Is it useful as a redirect there, I'm undecided. Thryduulf (talk) 16:15, 28 September 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! 09:04, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not G1, but this would have qualified for G2. Delete this poor ATD per nom. We have redirect History (Michael Jackson album) to help readers. Jay 💬 13:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kaalgat

Kaalgat → Nudity#Terminology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unmentioned dialectal/foreign language synonym. Xeroctic (talk) 08:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FORRED. No affinity for South Africa --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:11, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Portrait of a Family (film)

Portrait of a Family (film) → Ryu Seung-ryong#Filmography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Portrait of a Family (upcoming film) → Ryu Seung-ryong#Filmography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This nomination is basically a contest to the redirection to its current title per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portrait of a Family (film). (Note: I chose not to do a WP:DRV for this since I do not think that would have been applicable since I'm debating the redirect, not the article.) Unfortunately, since the content that was formerly at this title was deleted, I cannot validate the problem I am about to state which should result in this redirect being deleted rather than redirected:

The fact that one of multiple potential biographical subjects (see article history for reference) was chosen as a redirect target for this redirect is a combination of WP:UNDUE, WP:RSURPRISE, and WP:XY issues. (I also made this point at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaadhal Konjam Thookala.) This redirect really should be deleted per WP:REDLINK in the event the subject ever becomes notable enough for an article, or at the bare minimum, not be a redirect pointing towards any biographical article. (With all that being said, by default, I have no opposition to targeting to a valid non-biographical target [provided one is found].)

In addition, reviewing WP:NFF, which is seemingly the guideline cited for why this title was redirected, there is no mention anywhere in it for where such titles of WP:NFF-failing subjects should be redirected ... heck, there's not even a mention of guidance to have these titles redirected at all. (Also, @Bearcat, ReaderofthePack, Eva UX, and RangersRus: Pinging participants of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portrait of a Family (film) in the event they wish to participate in this discussion.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:20, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As a general rule, it can be appropriate in certain circumstances for a film that can't be shown to pass notability criteria for its own article to be redirected to its director — but there's really no precedent whatsoever for a film to be redirected to an individual actor in its cast. Especially when there are seven actors in its cast with Wikipedia articles to choose, setting up an WP:XY problem because we have no way of knowing which particular actor's participation in the cast was of the most interest to any individual reader.
So a non-notable film can be redirected to a biographical article about its director if there's a reason for that, but a redlink is preferable to redirecting a film title anywhere else besides its director — the director's article could at least contain a couple of lines about the fact that the film was planned and developed yet never came out, whereas that would be entirely WP:UNDUE in the BLP of any actor in its cast. Which in turn means that Ryu Seung-ryong's article contains no meaningful context for why a film title is redirecting to him, no meaningful context for why his article was chosen as the redirect target over Ha Ji-won or Kim Si-a or Kim Hae-sook or Kim Sun-young, and on and so forth.
A film's director is a valid ATD redirect target (if he or she has an article), because that article could at least contain some context for why the film redirects there. Actors in its cast are not appropriate or viable redirect targets, because they can't include that same context. Bearcat (talk) 12:34, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 07:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Art C. Jones

Art C. Jones → Arlie C. Jones (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was moved in 2015 by MisterCake with the rationale Don't see him called art anywhere, but arlie everywhere[3] No mention of this name at the target. Should delete the redirect Art C. Jones and update its links if the name is not verifiable. —Bagumba (talk) 07:11, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's fair to assume "Art" doesn't have due weight, so I say Delete. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited

The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hongkong and shanghai banking corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hong kong and shanghai banking corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hong kong and shanghai banking corporation limited → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hongkong Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited → HSBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to HSBC (Hong Kong). The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited is a bank incorporated and headquartered in Hong Kong. The current target, HSBC, is about HSBC Holdings plc, a British financial services group whose principal subsidiaries include HSBC UK (legally HSBC UK Bank plc) and HSBC (Hong Kong) (legally The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited). feminist🩸 (talk) 06:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 07:06, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget for sure. The actual, founding, original, Hong Kong-based bank is a much better target for this than the London headquarters. The Hong Kong HSBC was even originally the parent company. I can see an argument for keeping though, and wouldn't be prejudiced against it. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great Expectations (upcoming TV series)

Great Expectations (upcoming TV series) → Great Expectations (2023 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 11 § Great Expectations (upcoming TV series) – no consensus

Combing through old RfDs, it seems we have had an actively misleading redirect for 2+ years now with this TV series having released in early 2023. Subjected to a no consensus RfD = we forgot about it. Personally, I'm glad it didn't last until 2026, assuming that it is deleted in this discussion. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:18, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redirect per nom. =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 07:09, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would go as far as to say Speedy delete. It's not an upcoming series anymore! It used to be, and now it's not. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 07:52, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion would not apply. Deletion is regularly contested for these types of pages, and this one in particular survived RfD despite having been released for over a year by the time it was discussed (I was a participant in that RfD). At the time, the redirects pageviews were considered substantial. However, the pageviews are not there anymore. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:54, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Caste (upcoming film)

Caste (upcoming film) → Origin (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Outdated working title, already released (CC) Tbhotch^™ 04:19, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the target is not an upcoming film titled "Caste". No mentions of a sequel or remake with this name, either. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:31, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:UFILM. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 07:55, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:12, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israël

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

WP:FORRED, French is not a common language in Israel A1Cafel (talk) 03:36, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PewDiePie is next

PewDiePie is next → It's Everyday Bro (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Random line from the song, not mentioned at the target page. Without any context or lyric mention, people who search for this would be left confused about why they didn't go to a PewDiePie specific page, because Wikipedia is not a lyric database and searching for lyrics takes you to the song's page a comfortable 0% of the time for the infinite lyrics out there. No reason to expect this one to exist. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:04, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Something to note regarding other redirects that point to this song, "England is my city" does have a mention, and is a rare example of a useful "R from lyric" (it was created in 2018; I'll refine it to the reception section now that I've seen it). Simply being a lyric does not justify existence as a redirect, the redirect has to take readers to material about the lyric. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:07, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not every line from a song needs to redirect to the song, especially one so vague. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Powdery (mildew)

Powdery (mildew) → Erysiphaceae (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Bizarre construction. It was linked in a handful of articles about wine grapes (e.g. Abouriou) as "[[powdery (mildew)|powdery]] and [[downy mildew]]. The construction kind of makes sense in that very specific context, but I can't see people search for what is essentially a partial title match of an adjective (powdery) with the noun it modifies as a parenthetical term. Plantdrew (talk) 02:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. → Inigo Montoya (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die. → Inigo Montoya (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Someone who types out four sentences in this situation, already knows who Inigo Montoya is (they had to include the name in the quote). This quote is not currently mentioned in the article, and people searching for the page for "Inigo Montoya" would not spend time writing out the four short sentences he says. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:18, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to The Princess Bride (film) Shocksingularity (talk) 04:58, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To weigh in on this suggestion, this phrase is not mentioned at the film's article either. An uninformed reader has no reliable way to figure out which of these targets this redirect would take them by looking at it, as it's basically a coin flip. Neither page gives the necessary content, with mention, to satisfy people deliberately searching for the quote instead of searching for the film, or character. If someone don't know the name of the film, searching this quote in Google would give the name straightaway. Wikipedia is not a script database, redirects for important lines from the movie are an exception, not standard. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:17, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only Link can defeat Ganon

Only Link can defeat Ganon → Link: The Faces of Evil and Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon#Plot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This phrase is no longer mentioned or discussed at the topic. This is apparently a meme from the game, but it's not the way that people would be searching for this game, and this phrase is trivial. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:50, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gee! it sure is boring around here

Gee! it sure is boring around here → Link: The Faces of Evil and Zelda: The Wand of Gamelon#Plot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unmentioned quotation, grammatically incorrect. People who search for this quote will not be able to read about it. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ruby-chan! Hai! Nani ga suki?

Ruby-chan! Hai! Nani ga suki? → Ai Scream! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ruby-chan? Hai! Nani ga suki? → Ai Scream! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ayuma-chan! Hai! Nani ga suki → Ai Scream! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Shiki-chan! Hai! Nani ga suki → Ai Scream! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

None of these call-off lyrics are mentioned in the article. People who search for these lyrics will not be able to read about them at the target, and I don't think anyone expects article content to be located at every single call-off from the song, no matter the virality. Wikipedia is not a lyric database, searching this lyric on Google will tell you the song name immediately of Ai Scream. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:37, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Largest(s) City-Metro populations of the Pacific Northwest

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

October 3

Template:Colorblind

Template:Colorblind → Template:Overcoloured (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Template:Colourblind → Template:Overcoloured (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not used at all — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 11:17, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arguably the problem here is with the present name, which misses the point by not addressing the accessibility issue. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:40, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I’ve merged the similar nominations. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:53, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now, unless someone had any better overall suggestions. I don't like the name of the maintenance template itself, since it doesn't really describe the root issue that's meant to be dealt with. But this is a pretty natural starting place to look for templates to warn of potential issues for colorblind users. So unless there are any better targets, it seems reasonable to have this one. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per @35.139.154.158. Even if it's underused, I think it's a good redirect that's accurate to its topic. And even if it's underused, it's cheap to keep. I honestly think it'd be better if the article name and redirect name were swapped. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 00:26, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above !votes and comment by Chris Cunningham. It seems these *should* be in use and are likely to be helpful. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaves (band)

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

Malplaced redirect. Retarget (either to The Leaves or Leaf (disambiguation)#Arts, entertainment, and media) or move? ArthananWarcraft (talk) 13:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move Leaves (Icelandic band) to Leaves (band) per WP:SMALLDETAILS, it's only notable band with this exact name. The same should be done for Leaf (Dutch band) → Leaf (band). -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Leaf (disambiguation)#Arts, entertainment, and media as the nom's 2nd suggestion. Oppose moving Leaves (Icelandic band) to Leaves (band) as The Leaves is also a band and has 997 views compared with only 85[[4]] for the Icelandic band. SMALLDETAILS doesn't really work here as things that formerly include the word "The" are normally ambiguous without "The" except maybe with the likes of Crown/The Crown where it is obvious the other meaning will include "The" in the name. We often remove the word "The" in titles anyway and as such "Leaves (band)" is likely ambiguous with both bands. Leaf (Dutch band) could maybe be moved to Leaf (band) as although plural and singular is normally interchangeable with generic meanings with media it is more likely that they are not interchangeable and a hatnote would be fine. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Leaf (disambiguation)#Arts, entertainment, and media and Oppose @Tavix per @Crouch, Swale, I think that's a better suggestion! Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 00:30, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Google says '"the leaves" band' is 10 pages of search results. 'leaves band iceland' is 11 pages of search results. Reject using pageviews as an indicator, that just shades non UK or USA bands for no valid reason. Snævar (talk) 09:48, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All I need is my love tonight

All I need is my love tonight → Love Tonight (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrect lyric. It's "All I need is your love tonight", not "my". ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a typo. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:24, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Utah valley shooting

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

3 Kasane Teto redirects

Triple baka → Kasane Teto#Notable songs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Teto territory → Kasane Teto#Songs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Teto Pear → Kasane Teto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

So, I have separate rationales for each of these redirects.

For the first, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 20#Triple Baka. Should be deleted for the same reasons provided by the nominator (NegativeMP1) in that RfD.
For the second, the section it links to (Songs) no longer exists. Could it be referring to "Kasane Territory ~ Always Teto’s Turn", which is mentioned at the Character section?
For the third, it's not mentioned anywhere in the article, and I doubt readers are trying to look for it.

Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 11:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: For the second one, that is the same song mentioned in the Character section. Kline • talk • contribs 12:18, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Triple baka as too vague (it can refer to 3 different characters!) and we have precedent; Retarget Teto territory to Kasane Teto#Character, Delete Teto Pear since anyone searching for Teto will already get redirected at "Teto", the Pear meme is unnecessary and extraneous for this circumstance. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on WP:CHEAP. Yes, some of these are niche memes, but it's useful for someone. guninvalid (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Triple Baka is a song topic that is not mentioned. Teto Territory is a song topic that is not mentioned. Teto Pear is a meme that is not mentioned. Without a mention, people who search for these subjects will not be able to read about it, and will be left looking for material that doesn't exist. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:30, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Competitive mathematics

Competitive mathematics → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematical competition → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Maths Olympiads → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics scholarship competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math Scholarship Competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math Bowl → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics contest → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Maths competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Maths competition → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics contests → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math Olympiads → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics Competitions → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math competition → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics competition → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 12 § Math Olympiad – retarget

The Mathematical olympiad page exists now, unlike when the redirect was created. (See earlier RfD by me. I missed a few links. I apologise if I have missed any more, there are a lot.) Just a generic username (talk) 09:08, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Mathematical olympiad is a great idea. It'll lead to less confusion in readers and will direct them where they want to be. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:22, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Are there "math competitions" that don't fit the description of a "math olympiad"? The article might still be the best target but I'm not sure. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:35, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To my knowledge, no. And no article on "math competitions" in particular has been created.

The only exception I can think of is when the math is too easy to be considered "olympiad" math, but the AMC 8 only has really basic math, and yet is still considered "olympiad" math. (See https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c3413_amc_8 for examples of problems.) Just a generic username (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myceteae. Whoops, forgot to ping. Just a generic username (talk) 23:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom and consistency with the related RfD. This assumes there is no significant disagreement about whether there are many important non-olympiad "competitions". --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:26, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The original target, List of mathematics competitions, claims math competitions and math olympiads to be synonymous. Just a generic username (talk) 03:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of games with Wii-to-DS connectivity

List of games with Wii-to-DS connectivity → List of Wii games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

List article does not discuss cross-platform play. This should have gone to AfD/PROD, not a blank-and-redirect. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:54, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The createor, SimmerALPHA (talk · contribs), also created a category that is being discussed at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_October_3#Category:Games_with_Wii-DS_connectivity. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 08:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Shocksingularity (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Apple

Steve Apple → Steve Jobs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Steve Jobs is so well known in the general public that even people who aren't in the slightest interested in the history of Apple know that Steve Jobs was the CEO until Tim Cook took over.

Note that I didn't nominate Tim Apple, because that misnomer is A) notable, as it was stated by Trump and B) mentioned in the article User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting hits for a Daily Planet (Philadelphia newspaper) writer. Retarget there? -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:06, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Daily Planet (Philadelphia newspaper), I guess. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ball so hard, motherfuckers wanna find me

Ball so hard, motherfuckers wanna find me → Niggas in Paris (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ball so hard → Niggas in Paris (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ball So Hard → Niggas in Paris (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Line from song that is not mentioned at the target. People who search for this lyric, will not be able to receive information about the lyric at the target due to no mention. Wikipedia is not a lyric database. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:09, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, I agree with you. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:23, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom, we don't need redirects from every single line. I've also added another one. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CABT

CABT → Cock and ball torture (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"CABT" is not mentioned at the target article, and does not seem to be a used acronym. (The one that is used, is "CBT"). When I search "CABT" on Google (even with Safe Mode off), none of the search results have anything to do with this subject, and can refer to any of the topics where it is a used acronym, including "Coalition Against Bigger Trucks", "Certified Associate in Biomedical Technology", "California Bank & Trust", "Computer Applications and Business Technology", and more. On Wikipedia, "CABT" is mentioned at Communauté de communes du Nord du Bassin de Thau. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We don't have articles for any of the 4 topics you listed, and Communauté de communes du Nord du Bassin de Thau has very little due weight. CABT is not a common term for CBT so it's best to just remove it to reduce confusion, and also to not scare away people searching Coalition Against Bigger Trucks on Google. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete Idek mann (talk) 19:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as rarely used acronym hindering search Shocksingularity (talk) 05:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:13, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Time Out Abu Dhabi

Time Out Abu Dhabi → Time Out (magazine) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of "Abu Dhabi" at the target; readers will not be able to read about this regional magazine at the general page for Time Out. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, with no mention of Abu Dhabi in the article this redirect is pointless - anyone searching for Time Out itself will have already gotten it in the search box while typing that in. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:29, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: For this reason, should a list of regional publications be added to the target article instead (like the ACBJ)? I created it because I saw other Time Out redirects, such as Time Out London and Time Out New York. It was also specifically because of the redirect's website when you access it via a reference. Hence, the redirect. Samuelsp15 (talk) 17:31, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, keep and add a list of publications (duplicate from Time Out Group) in the target article, or retarget it to Time Out Group#Time Out publications. For me, it is easier to click or tap it rather than to type and search for the magazine (when accessed via a reference). Although there is no mention of "Abu Dhabi" (as of this comment) in the target article, the redirect could be useful for readers to know about Time Out magazine in general, as Time Out Abu Dhabi is under Time Out itself, not under a different company. However, if others find this redirect unhelpful, then it can be deleted. Samuelsp15 (talk) 06:15, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Surry County High School

Surry County High School → Dendron, Virginia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of a "high school" at the target, people who want to read about this high school will not receive any information at the page for the town, besides that "Dendron had 2 schools in 1928". Unclear if this is the same school as there is no discussion about it. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm guessing someone from there wanted a page about the school. But with no mention of the school by name, there's no reason for the redirect to exist. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:31, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Surry County Public Schools where it's mentioned. It's not much though, so Surry County, Virginia#Education might be a better home for it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rural Retreat High School

Rural Retreat High School → Rural Retreat, Virginia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of a high school at the target, nor the word "school". People who want to read about this particular school, will not be able to do so at the general page for the town. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:00, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not mentioned in the article text so no redirect is necessary. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:31, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-glasses gang

Anti-glasses gang → Khmer Rouge (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Anti glasses gang → Khmer Rouge (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of "glasses" at the target article, much less "anti" the aforementioned glasses. People who want to read about the gang that they searched for (which is seemingly meme terminology), will not be able to do so at the target, nor anywhere on Wikipedia. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. Just a generic username (talk) 09:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm guessing someone wanted to get a laugh out of Wikipedia, so I think this falls under D3. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This refers to the reports that the Khmer Rouge would execute anyone wearing glasses. It's mentioned at Cambodian genocide, but not by this name, which is a WP:NEOLOGISM. - Eureka Lott 21:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Eureka Lott --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iran-backed

Iran-backed → Iran and state-sponsored terrorism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previously used to target Iranian support for the Houthis, now targets the general page for State-sponsored terrorism in Iran. "Iran-backed" appears to be able to refer to several different things, not limited to just these two.

It is seemingly a vague term for Iran supporting anything. Be it the Houthis, terrorism, or anything else that Iran could fund. I'm not convinced this is a useful redirect when "Iran-backed" is only mentioned twice at the current target. Seeing search results for this term instead of a redirect might be more useful. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague. Iran-backed is a simple linguistic construct that could refer to absolutely anything. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:16, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. You're right, it's not a useful redirect. I could understand if it was called "Iran-backed terrorism", but as it stands now, it's cut too short to be a valid search term. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:14, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkishpedia

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

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 March 12 § Turkishpedia – delete

"Turkishpedia" does not appear at the target. Does not appear to be an alternate name. When I do an external search for "TurkishPedia", Wikipedia is nowhere to be found. Instead, it appears to be a blog that is listed as an author on various websites such as [5], [6]. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:33, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creator of redirect here, so I may be biased: Keep Plausible enough misnomer for a few people to mistakenly write it in expecting to go to the Turkish Wikipedia article, and the blog articles list "TurkishPedia" as they're most likely using fragments of relevant articles from Turkish Wikipedia User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:38, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What evidence of use is there for "Turkishpedia"? It appears nowhere on all of Wikipedia, in any of its namespaces, beyond RfD. Could be more likely a misspelling of "Turkish media". No such Englishpedia or Spanishpedia either. (Also the second link says, when translated, "Turkishpedia is a memory platform for Turkish Airlines that contains corporate encyclopedic data", which appears to be a different subject matter entirely). Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:47, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST as to why "No such Englishpedia or Spanishpedia either" isn't really a solid argument against Turkishpedia specifically User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It appears there is or was a website Turkishpedia.com that covered Turkish politics per their X and other inactive social media profiles. The website is also referenced here. This plus the Turkish Airlines reference Utopes noted indicate that Turkishpedia is/was a real thing, maybe more than one real thing, and not Turkish Wikipedia. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:14, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update - I created this from an old RFD from 2016 that said "and consider recreating (without the current page history) as a redirect to Turkish Wikipedia". Since I found it a plausible enough misnomer, I boldly created this redirect to Turkish Wikipedia. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm sorry, but Turkishpedia is just not a common search term. I don't think this will help readers. I'd delete it. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Myceteae. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Cerco 99

Operation Cerco 99 → Óscar Ramírez Durand (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Page with history. Creator now blocked. No mention of this particular "Cerco 99" operation at the target page; readers who search for this will not be able to read about it. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:25, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2026–27 EFL Championship

2026–27 EFL Championship → EFL Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
2026-27 EFL Championship → EFL Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:TOOSOON, no info on this timespan at the target, no mention of 2027 anywhere. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Respublik (talk) 03:18, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, too soon. WP:CRYSTALBALL too! Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:15, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1987 Lurigancho massacre

1987 Lurigancho massacre → Peruvian prison massacres (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
1987 Santa Bárbara massacre → Peruvian prison massacres (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
1987 El Frontón massacre → Peruvian prison massacres (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These massacres did not occur in 1987. These are not referred to as the "Santa Barbara massacre"s and etc. Creator later blocked for sockpuppetry. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:07, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy G5 deletion~~ then as blocked per Peruvian history matters. Respublik (talk) 03:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) WP:G5 doesn't apply because these were created in early April, before the original creator was blocked for sockpuppetry in late April (i.e. not originally created in violation of a ban or block). However, they made a number of questionable redirects that have since been uncovered and nominated in September. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've reversed these two dates in my memory, my bad. Respublik (talk) 03:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vandalism. Respublik (talk) 03:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to the year mismatch. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical olympiads

Mathematical olympiads → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics olympiad → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Olympiad of mathematics → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Mathematics Olympiad → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math Olympiad → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Math Olympics → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Maths Olympics → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Maths Olympiad → List of mathematics competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 12 § Math Olympiad – retarget

When the previous RfD occured, there was no Mathematical olympiad page, but now there is, so these should be retargeted there. Just a generic username (talk) 02:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Just a generic username the target for all of these should be List of mathematics competitions, which is the current target. I take it you are recommending that these all be retargeted to Mathematical olympiad. Can you fix the formatting? I fixed the "Mathematical olympiads" section heading. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myceteae:

Done. @Just a generic username: Please note that the previous target needs to be added to the nomination as well. CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:06, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 🙏🏾 (I could have done it myself, but it's a rather tedious task…) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:25, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myceteae: Whoops, I apologise for my lack of familiarity with the procedure. (This is my first RfD.) To be clear, the target= field should be the current target? Then would I recommend the new target redirect in the text= field?

Thanks for the help, @CycloneYoris.

Just a generic username (talk) 03:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Just a generic username Yep, that's correct. It can be confusing, and it's different from WP:RMCD where the arrow indicates the proposed new name. Welcome to RfD! I find it's a pretty helpful bunch here. 😃 --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy retarget to Mathematical olympiad as long as it continues to exist. These are seemingly uncontroversial R from plurals/other modifications. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy retarget as an obviously better choice. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:00, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:04, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closely related RfD (links I missed from not checking Special:WhatLinksHere the first time) Just a generic username (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy retarget these as well. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Men who lie with men

Men who lie with men → Men who have sex with men (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Keep, retarget to Sexual practices between men or something Book of Leviticus related, or… ? I retargeted a handful of other redirects away from the current target to Sexual practices between men, which is the more general article on the subject rather than specific "men who have sex with men" ("MSM") terminology used especially in public health contexts. "Lie with" can be a direct substitute for "have sex with" here and this specific phrasing has religious and cultural connotations that don't apply to the others so I'm unsure what to do with it. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:29, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think it's fine. MSM is a pretty common term, and lie with is basically a synonym. I'm not that prejudiced towards the retarget though. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 2

Paradote

Paradote → Paracetamol#Prevention (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Paracetamol poisoning#Combination with other agents where the subject is described. Paradote is not mentioned in Paracetamol. § Prevention no longer exists and the product appears to have been discontinued. This is an {{R from merge}} so I am nominating rather than boldly retargeting. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:43, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Retarget per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:15, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. I see no issue with that. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:パリス・ヒルトン

Draft:パリス・ヒルトン → Paris Hilton (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. This fails WP:FORRED considerations and the 'Draft:' makes it even more non-standard. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:32, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete. doesn't seem to be an r from move either, and パリス・ヒルトン never existed consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 23:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:16, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems like a simple mistake. Drafts shouldn't redirect to mainspace. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 12:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Drunk Experiter there's actually no inherent problem with that. in fact, wp:rdraft details when that's perfectly fine. that said, this never was a draft, so it doesn't work :( consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's good to know for future reference! Thank you for the info. Ah well, Delete still stands. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Jack

Mike Jack → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Michael Jackson never went by this name. Google Search shows totally different results. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The only person by this name who I can find mention of on en.wp is a Scottish footballer whose most prominent mention is at 2008–09 Scottish Third Division#Top scorers (where he finished joint first). I haven't investigated whether they are notable or not but if they are this should be seen as a WP:RETURNTORED situation. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Disambig, i dont see any cases of someone calling him like that, altough there might be some people called "mike jack" that have an article. AquilatorG10 Talk Contribs 18:03, 25 September 2025 (UTC) Strike sock comment. Redir editor ^(talk)_{aka Dsuke1998AEOS} 13:01, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Thryduulf. There's no evidence of anyone with an article using this name so there is nothing to disambiguate. A "Mike Jack" article, redirect, or dab page can be re-created in the future if such individuals are identified and deemed suitable for inclusion. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:27, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is a very uncommon nickname. Michael Jackson never used it a far as I know. Felicia (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Like That (Future, Metro Boomin and Kendrick Lamar song) § Composition and lyrics. Other than referring to a person who does not currently have a wikipedia article, this is very likely a reference to the song Like That, which is most of what I get in search results other than a youtuber. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 20:03, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I got a ton of search results for the YouTuber/competitive eater, who has a passing mention at Capri-Sun. There was also apparently a character named Mike Jack in The Great Man, mentioned in the article. The Kendrick song is popular but in terms of on-wiki content I don't find the passing reference there any better than these others (including the footballer). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:32, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. The Kendrick song is likely recentism on my part. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 23:51, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also: the other Michael Jackson RfD currently. While it's possible that the Kendrick lyric inspired this, it's at least equally likely that we just have an editor who wants every possible variation of the name to point to Michael Jackson. Noting, of course, that we should still consider these on their individual merits. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that microphone jack redirects to Phone connector (audio) Sting Kipu (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:44, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I searched and couldn't find articles about anyone legally, professionally, etc. named or known as Mike Jack. The page could possibly be expanded into an article about someone with that name, but for now we should WP:RETURNTORED. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 23:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think the Kendrick song lyrics has sufficient due weight, so the redirect falls under D8. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 12:50, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate with Like That (Future, Metro Boomin and Kendrick Lamar song)#Composition and lyrics and 2008–09 Scottish Third Division. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Victorian newspapers

List of Victorian newspapers → List of newspapers in Victoria (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Recent creation from a page move, was at this title for all of three minutes. I don't feel comfortable CSDing it as I don't think this is precisely implausible but "Victorian" to me overwhelming suggested the Victorian period to the point of being actively confusing here. Rusalkii (talk) 07:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig between the present target and List of the oldest newspapers which is where someone looking for newspapers from the Victorian era will find the articles we have. Thryduulf (talk) 12:41, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambig per Thryduulf. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 16:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The List of the oldest newspapers does not identify which newspapers are Victorian. It includes the country and year of first publication; presumably a paper that was in print in England/the British Empire before Queen Victoria's reign and continued during it would be "Victorian" in this sense but this information isn't readily available and the oldest newspapers list isn't designed to present it. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:11, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete highly ambiguous -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, "Victorian" is the standard adjective pertaining to the state of Victoria. Since there is no article about newspapers from the Victorian era, there is no ambiguity in terms of potential targets. (Disclaimer: I am Victorian.) This, that and the other (talk) 01:49, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but even if the redirect needs to be deleted, I would say that the page itself should be kept (I know that's separate to this discussion). As an Australian state, I understand that there are other newspaper lists in this same titling format, e.g. List of newspapers in New South Wales. SunnyBoi (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, There is no other list of newspapers for a particular 'era' in history. The word 'Victorian' makes complete sense in an Australian context and the people searching for this page are most likely to be Australian and thus 'Victorian' makes sense. Kassigrace (talk) 03:09, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I don't think it has much to do with the time period, it's useful to Australian readers! Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:54, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a plausible alternative name. Readers will most likely use it in searches. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 10:25, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WasabiXML

WasabiXML → User interface markup language#WasabiXML (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Completely new to RfD, but this redirect targets a section that (correctly) no longer exists. The topic is insufficiently notable to warrant even a 1-sentence mention on this page. Suriname0 (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, this is an argument for deletion of this redirect. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of user interface markup languages § WasabiXML; WasabiXML is still mentioned at List of user interface markup languages, so that is probably a good target for now. Having said that, I do not necessarily know if the inclusion is warranted on that page either. I have not found a whole lot of information detailing the notability of WasabiXML. If it is removed from that page, count this as a delete. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:29, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good find. I found an extremely terse passing mention in a table here. To my view, this doesn't warrant even a mention. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 20:33, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of user interface markup languages § WasabiXML per @Casablanca 🪨, I don't think one little extra language'll kill us - unless you could consider its entry WP:OR. But hey, a terse passing mention is more than nothing! Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:21, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The terse passing mention is from a predatory journal, which I only discovered after making the comment (since I use the predatory journal link highlighter script). For that reason, I'll remove the block discussing WasabiXML at User interface markup language after this discussion has closed (I assume it's bad form to edit target pages during redirect discussions?). Very possible this was citogenesis, since the Wikipedia info precedes the journal proceedings. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 23:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Really? If so, feel free to Delete both the article entry and the redirect. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C.

Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C. → 2019–20 Wigan Athletic F.C. season (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was closed as a redirect at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C. however I still consider this a really bad redirect, it redirects to one season article and completely ignores 2019–20 Hull City A.F.C. season I suggest it should be deleted. I also feel it's highly unlikely people will be typing that full title. Govvy (talk) 10:28, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:16, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't really think this is much of an WP:XY, as the game is far more meaningful to Wigan than it is to Hull City, so targeting its article makes more sense. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 15:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:05, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a too burdensome usage of a redirect, that doesn't even have an acceptable best potential target. Respublik (talk) 03:35, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael McGaharn

Michael McGaharn → Knuckles the Echidna (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

originally an unsourced, poorly written, factually incorrect stub taken from draftspace, knuckles (& knuckles, featuring knuckles from the knuckles may chuckle series) only seems to be his most notable role by an extremely narrow margin, and i haven't found anything for him beyond whatever this is (which isn't even primarily about him)

i hate that my second favorite knuckles the echidna from k.n.u.c.k.l.e.s. in knuckles the echidna: knuckles' last chuckle & knuckles from knuckles may chuckle 2: knuckle of the year edition voice actor is one of only three without an article, why does reality have to chuckle at my knuckles and my knuckles like this... consarn _{(just believe in knuckles) (won't rely on knuckles)} 22:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

as an aside not related to anything i can spam knuckles jokes about, there seems to be another michael mcgaharn who is... a strangely prolific bank worker of some sort? dude's not notable either, but i found a lot of stuff that at least has his name on it, so chances are he's a big shot. you know, the kind who would rather flex his kn- consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 22:07, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, more specifically make it link directly to Knuckles the Echidna#Voice portrayal. I think it's worth keeping, and the only other place on Wikipedia that mentions him is Sonic Adventure#Characters and art, so as far as we're concerned, Knuckles is what he's notable for. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
there's a problem with this: is he actually notable for this? the citations backing it up in the current target are 1 and 3. 1 is behind the voice actors, which is usable for verification but not really for notability, and 3 is an interview from what seems to be a blog that doesn't mention him at all, so all we really have is a list of voice actors and a seemingly unassessed article that only mentions him in passing (this being the one i found). as another aside, check the snapshots from citation 3 as of december 2018, they're really funny, i'd rather chuckle this time

as for sonic adventure, its citation is actually just the credits of the game, and he's also mentioned in burning rangers, also in passing and only with primary sources consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 22:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly, that's not very notable. But it's not like he's got his own article - it's just a redirect. I don't know, deleting the redirect wouldn't be terrible, but I don't think it's entirely necessary. He is still mentioned in the articles after all. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 13:01, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hallejuah (Kanye West song)

Hallejuah (Kanye West song) → Heil Hitler (song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misspelled; the song was actually released as Hallelujah, not Hallejuah. Delete. Duckmather (talk) 21:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the reason given Wackistan (talk) 21:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a typo. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Christmas Collection(Amy Grant album)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move without redirect to The Christmas Collection (2008 Amy Grant album)

Las Muertas

Las Muertas → The Dead Girls (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Just created this redirect ... but now, I'm not sure if it should be "retargeted to Jorge Ibargüengoitia as a {{R from work}}" (1977 novel written by this author) or "keep" (target subject is based on the novel created by the aforementioned author). Thoughts on this? (At the present time, we seem to not have an article for the novel.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The novel should be at Las Muertas. All derivative works should be dabbed. Las Muertas (TV series) on ENWP could go to The Dead Girls. That is the way it is set up on ESWP where both have articles named this way.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I guess we don't have a novel article yet. Currently the novel content is at Jorge Ibargüengoitia#Novels, so Las Muertas should redirect there until the separate article exists. Put a hatnote on the authors article explaining the novel redirect.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:10, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2 redirects to a fangame that is barely mentioned the target yayy

I Wanna Be the Boshy → I Wanna Be the Guy#Fan games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I Wanna Be The Boshy → I Wanna Be the Guy#Fan games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

IWBTB (while popular in the IWBTG fagame community) is only mentioned once, in a "Hey, this exists" kinda way. Anyone who doesn't know what IWBTB is would barely be helped by this redirect, and anyone who does know what IWBTB is would be better off looking elsewhere (as in, non-Wikipedia sites). User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – I'm not sure I understand the objection. "Hey, this exists" describes the destination coverage of many redirects; WP:REDIRECT says that one reason for a redirect is for "Subtopics or other topics that are described ... within a wider article". It seems better to the reader to get this one sentence than for the redirect not to exist, so I support keeping it. Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 03:42, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for me. IWBTB being mentioned in the article gives the redirects due weight. It's one of IWBTG's biggest fan games and has quite a decent amount of searches, I think. I'm biased myself, of course - back when I was younger, IWBTB was something I played before I even knew IWBTG was a thing. As a younger reader, if I looked IWBTB on Wikipedia, I would've appreciated the redirect. I think that may be the case for others. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 19:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

May 25, 2020

May 25, 2020 → Murder of George Floyd (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is not the only notable event that has happened on this date. There was also the Central Park birdwatching incident, the Killing of Dion Johnson, the 2020 Surinamese general election and many others. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to a disambiguation page is probably the right call, then. Ehh, is that what we do with dates? Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget to Portal:Current events/2020 May 25. Not a fan of WP:XNRs from the article space to any other space, but it seems to be the best target we got. Steel1943 (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget as Steel suggests per prior identical Rfd results. Respublik (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot I made this haha. Anyway, I think retargeting (per Steel) is the best move. Jalapeño (u t g) 07:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ROad Rash

ROad Rash → Road Rash (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
TObey Maguire → Tobey Maguire (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fire EMblem → Fire Emblem (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
THe Little Mermaid → The Little Mermaid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Virtual COnsole → Virtual Console (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
STar Ocean → Star Ocean (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Castlevania Portrait of rUin → Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
WilD Arms TV → Wild Arms: Twilight Venom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
G gUndam → Mobile Fighter G Gundam (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Life FOrce → Life force (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Spider RIders → Spider Riders (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Drill DOzer → Drill Dozer (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
SLayers → Slayers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Barney the DInosaur → Barney & Friends#Characters and cast (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
SHanks → Shanks (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
SOma → Soma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Galley-La COmpany → List of One Piece characters#Galley-La Company (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
MusicBRainz → MusicBrainz (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
MIyano Mamoru → Mamoru Miyano (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:UNNATURAL capitalisations, as per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20#Oliver and COmpany; also all created by the same user as in that nomination. Some of these had been nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 26#TObey Maguire in the past, but there has been consensus in the recent discussion to delete. (In fact, I did not realise WIld Arms was part of the old nomination as well when starting the recent one.) 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 17:14, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Different capitalisations aren't important to users because the search function shows them their desired search automatically, regardless of capitalisation. These are a waste of space and recent discussion points to consensus. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 17:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as functionless, as the search function doesn't require them, and there's no scenario where these spellings would ever be appropriately used in article prose. Sergecross73 msg me 17:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unlikely nonsense redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 19:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as terms with capitalizations that are unlikely to be used by readers in searches. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 19:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WhAt? YoU gUyS dOn'T tYpE lIkE tHiS oN tHe ReGuLaR? (delete as they are unlikely to be typed in this way in any regular sense). Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:54, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
only one of those is in random case consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:50, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Who types like this? Also, if you searched for any of these you already see the article. Whats the point??? I dont get why someone would make these pages? microTato^{(🗯️) (✍🏻)} 12:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete none of these appear to contain any significant history and Road Rash for example is stylized as "ROAD RASH" not "ROad Rash" in the logo. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blade of the Immrotal

Blade of the Immrotal → Blade of the Immortal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely typo given the length of the redirect, and only obstructs searches like Special:Search/immrotal and similar by not allowing the engine to perform automatic typo correction. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 17:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Katiedevi (talk) 06:06, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kung Fu Panda (film2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: deleted

Knuckles the Hedgehog

Knuckles the Hedgehog → Knuckles the Echidna (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Knuckles isn't a hedgehog, and I don't think he's ever been mistaken for one in the games or outside of them. Delete this redirect. Mr slav999 (talk) 14:05, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an implausible search term. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 14:52, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per knuckles. the average knuckles will likely not mistake knuckles for a hedgehog, even with the most cursory possible knowledge of sonic (& knuckles) and hedgehogs, and almost definitely won't misinterpret the term "hedgehog" as referring to knuckles, as it will almost invariably be preceded by the words "sonic the" (and then proceeded by "& knuckles") or "shadow the" consarn _{(uhh shit rock yeah)} 15:05, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Knuckles isn't a hedgehog! Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:XY for the same reason why Sonic the Echidna doesn't exist. (Since yeah, I get not everyone knows video game topics: Sonic the Hedgehog or Knuckles the Echidna?) Steel1943 (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Also as confusing --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as implausible. Sergecross73 msg me 00:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:THESIS1

Wikipedia:THESIS1 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#1. End decision-making by “consensus.” (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:ENDCONSENSUS → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#1. End decision-making by “consensus.” (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS2 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#2. Enable competing articles. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:LETCOMPETE → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#2. Enable competing articles. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:ABOLISHBLACKLISTS → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#3. Abolish source blacklists. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS3 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#3. Abolish source blacklists. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS4 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#4. Revive the original neutrality policy. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:REVIVENEUTRALITY → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#4. Revive the original neutrality policy. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS5 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#5. Repeal “Ignore all rules.” (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:REPEALIAR → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#5. Repeal “Ignore all rules.” (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS6 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#6. Reveal who Wikipedia’s leaders are. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS7 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#7. Let the public rate articles. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS8 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#8. End indefinite blocking. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:REVEALLEADERS → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#6. Reveal who Wikipedia’s leaders are. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:ENDPERMABLOCK → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#8. End indefinite blocking. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:THESIS9 → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#9. Adopt a legislative process. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:ADOPTASSEMBLY → User:Larry Sanger/Nine Theses#9. Adopt a legislative process. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:RATEARTICLES → Wikipedia:Content assessment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Also:

WP:ENDCONSENSUS WP:THESIS2 WP:LETCOMPETE WP:ABOLISHBLACKLISTS WP:THESIS3 WP:THESIS4 WP:REVIVENEUTRALITY WP:THESIS5 WP:REPEALIAR WP:THESIS6 WP:THESIS7 WP:THESIS8 WP:REVEALLEADERS WP:RATEARTICLES WP:ENDPERMABLOCK WP:THESIS9 WP:ADOPTASSEMBLY

Mostly for reason 4 at WP:RDEL but also 6, 8, etc

I don't object to there being a shortname redirect to this users essay but adding loads of them looks like a form of canvassing. JMWt (talk) 12:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is quite a lot for something in userspace. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 12:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
speedy close to properly nom those together (it's not a long story, it's just easier with massxfd lol), and tell larry that that's not what a thesis is consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oh right uh... otherwise, delete all, and edit the theses to not use curly quotes and put the sentence's punctuation inside the quotes (yuck) consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:57, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - it's pretty obvious this is an attempt to get attention to the essay, aside from WP:RDEL. ^EF⁵ 13:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Take em all down (Delete all) No reason to give a userspace essay with zero extra weight compared to any other of those random essays that are never read whatsoever so many shortcuts. Literally just one would suffice. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete them all per RDEL 4 and 6, less convinced about 8 applying but one good reason to delete is enough here. CNC (talk) 15:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not seeing these being used. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This argument is somewhat unfair, to e page was created less than a week ago, there will likely be more larger discussions on these points raised in the future (I myself plan to draft up proposal reguarding point nine) and therefore use is likely to increase. This may not pan out but saying their unused less than a week after creation seem misleading Olliefant (she/her) 05:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. These can be recreated if this essay becomes popular and people will be referencing it in discussions. Right now these shortcuts seem premature. At the moment it doesn't seem very likely that Larry Sanger's essay will become an important part of future discussions. Antibabelic (talk) 16:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have properly tagged and added to this nomination the additional redirects mentioned by the nominator. (Prior to this point, the only redirect properly tagged and added into this nomination was Wikipedia:THESIS1.) However, note though that Jlwoodwa changed the target of Wikipedia:RATEARTICLES prior to my tagging of the redirect: Wikipedia:RATEARTICLES now targets Wikipedia:Content assessment. Steel1943 (talk) 17:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~At the minimum, I am "delete Wikipedia:REPEALIAR" since I keep thinking it has something to do with reaping a liar. Steel1943 (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2025 (UTC)~~[reply]
Delete all except Wikipedia:RATEARTICLES (targeting Wikipedia:Content assessment). Agreed, all these shortcuts are overkill for a target so new and not even in the project space, co-founder of Wikipedia or not. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all except the new Wikipedia:RATEARTICLES → Wikipedia:Content assessment. Wikipedia is not a social networking site. User:Larry Sanger is entitled to his own user page and its contents and that's it. These redirects are too much. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 17:54, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 19:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all: The community would benefit by having deep links into the individual theses and essays, so that they can be discussed. This is not an ordinary essay. It's 37,000 words long, and each major section is a significant proposal that Wikipedia is being invited to consider. Larry Sanger (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's important to note that there are other mechanisms established for these kinds of proposals. Have you familiarized yourself with WP:GUIDANCE and WP:PROPOSAL? Antibabelic (talk) 21:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. One of the main points of the theses is to improve "mechanisms established for these kinds of proposals." Those mechanisms are definitely not established for these kinds of proposals. I would have you familiarize yourself, in turn, with WP:THESIS1 and WP:THESIS9, and other theses that specifically suggest ways to improve Wikipedia's processes. Larry Sanger (talk) 03:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per @JMWt, these are irrelevant, are not policy, and you should not be citing your own essay. You are on Wikipedia, so please learn and follow its policies. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 23:14, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all per Larry Sanger. Convenient redirects would facilitate much-needed discussions. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
However, creating shortcuts is not an appropriate way to go about facilitating and promoting discussion. We already have a process for that: Wikipedia:Requests for comment, amongst many other forums, such as Wikipedia:Village pump and its respective subpages. Steel1943 (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really inside the scope of RfC, though? At 37K words I assume no one is going to want to discuss the whole thing at once, so the shortcuts strike me as smart future-proofing. Tioaeu8943 (talk) 23:27, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the creator of the target is requesting comments, so ... I'd go with a "yes" there. That, and an RfC can be written to focus on whatever part of a page the RfC proposer desires; it doesn't have to be the whole page. Also, to counteract your point, if "...no one is going to want to discuss the whole thing at once...", where's the validation that they would want to do that even when directed to the target via shortcuts? Steel1943 (talk) 23:31, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Surely the point is that the individual essays may (and, I would argue, should) be cited and discussed in many different places. Larry Sanger (talk) 03:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that the one linked in the RFD won't and shouldn't, because it supports fringe theories and is antithetical to building a good encyclopedia. And I think fringe essays should not be parroted around Wikipedia any more than can fit in a user page. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all; there are plenty of projectspace redirects to user pages, e.g. WP:JIMBOTALK. This RfD is, at best, an exercise in bureaucratic neurosis for its own sake, and at worst, an asinine and petty attempt to blow a raspberry at the site's cofounder. jp×g 🗯️ 22:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...Kind of an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument there, but meh... Steel1943 (talk) 23:21, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A discussion of policy is a discussion of how things are done, and it's not possible to discuss how things are done without reference to the things. jp×g 🗯️ 02:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, just like how I referenced WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's an endless circle! Steel1943 (talk) 02:36, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of interest, I recommend in thesis 9 that we entirely dispense with the system of quasi-official essays, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is cited as an example of a bad essay that needs to be made a user space essay (or, if it can be adverted to at all, adopted explicitly as a policy by an editorial assembly). "This is frequently invoked, in a really shameless way, to justify inconsistency across articles." See also footnote 66. Larry Sanger (talk) 03:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant. If you want to contribute to discussions about the essay that you’ve written then kindly don’t cite it. JMWt (talk) 06:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am fully ready to die alongside Larry on the hill of WP:OTHERSTUFF being the dumbest WP:UPPERCASE in history, if not in the actual content at the end of the redirect, then surely in the ridiculous cartwheels it's invoked to enable on a daily basis. jp×g 🗯️ 06:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
not sure why you are telling me this. It's obvious to everyone that this "thesis" has no standing because it has not been discussed through the the normal channels. So citing it in a discussion about it is obviously out-of-process. The fact that one of the point is this discussion is about the whole notion of consensus makes it particularly ridiculous. How are we supposed to deal with that, other than crowning an alternative Jimbo to overturn decades of community practice.

If there is to be a meta discussion then that's fine. But not in this ridiculous way, like dribbles of diarrhea across the site. JMWt (talk) 08:51, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, I ask you to consider what would happen if every active editor did this. JMWt (talk) 06:42, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RDEL 4. - Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 23:27, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Smart-aleck invocation of RDEL4 entirely contrary to its spirit. jp×g 🗯️ 05:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't an attempt at being a smart-aleck, it's just that 18 redirects to a new user essay by someone who hasn't substantially edited in ~2 years seems unnecessary. It's also promotional given that they've used the essay's content as a jumping off point in the media with several interviews decrying Wikipedia.

I don't see how my invocation of REDEL 4 is at all inaccurate or contrary to its spirit, let alone inauthentic & I don't appreciate your remark implying otherwise. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 18:53, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think the page merits discussion and raises genuine questions with valid ideas. I think a wider discussion is needed enwiki wide and these redirects, while yes could be seen as RDEL4 violations given how they all popped up fairly quickly as opposed to being established over time, are fairly useful. I don't think there would be any RDEL4 concerns had Spangler either spaced out the creation or been a little more conservative in which he created. Redirects are hardly promotional, the only person they could possibly be trying to promote to are members of the NPP of which according to this there is less than 1000 members. Olliefant (she/her) 05:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, people have found them useful, per #5 in WP:RFD#KEEP. (In this particular situation, applying RDEL4 does not assume good faith, imo). These shortcuts are in project-space where they're not likely to bother anyone. Redirects from project-space are regularly able to point to userspace, if an editor has a thoughtful page they want a shortcut for. A vast number of userspace essays have shortcuts for the people who refer to these essays. Extra shortcuts here and there are WP:CHEAP, and don't appear to be confusable with any other pages currently (except possibly "RATEARTICLES", but even then WP:Content assessment has been fine since 2005 with the 58 incoming redirects it has already; retargeting it is splitting hairs that I'd rather just keep it, with a hatnote to content assessment if desired). Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Editors needn't be told how essay rds to userspaces are a dime a dozen and I have unfortunately seen these and others be cited as if they were policy, at the very least the rd shortcuts here clearly present that they are proposals and essays unlike many non-neutral shortcuts that go about. The creation of such a large number of these in a short amount of time may raise eyebrows but that isn't itself a criteria for deletion and it would be hard to argue that these are either promotional/spam etc. (or 6 [cross-namespace redirect out of article space], 8 [novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target]) rather than actual community proposals (however one may disagree with them). PS: And from what I can tell, the recent proposals and the interest in them as such may stem from an appearance by Larry Sanger at the The Tucker Carlson Show. At least these proposals are for the project than unserious contestations such as Grokipedia. Gotitbro (talk) 07:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This has received The Signpost coverage: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2025-10-02/News and notes. Gotitbro (talk) 11:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all It's one thing for cross-namespace redirects to be organically created over time as people refer to them in discussions, quite another for someone to create two dozen redirects to their own essay for promoting it. Applying WP:RFD#KEEP #5 is a stretch. – SD0001 (talk) 07:59, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per RDEL4. My word. Glen (talk) 08:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all This is heavy overkill and certainly monopolizing redirects to advertise one's essay. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete most While it's fine for this user to have written a long essay, it seems highly unlikely that it'll be so widely discussed that we'll need redirects to every section of it. If that turns out to be incorrect, we can re-create them. Looking at WP:RFD#DELETE, I find that #2 likely applies (making the essay seem like it's more accepted than it is) and #4 (self-promotion, as they were created by the author of the essay to promote the essay) seem to apply. OTOH, it appears that WP:RATEARTICLES has been retargeted; that (and any others that may be retargeted) should be discussed separately. Anomie ⚔ 12:18, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all for now with no prejudice to retarget if a more appropriate primary topic is found for any of them. Even ignoring the WP:ABF that comes with invoking WP:R#D4, people have said that they find these useful and WP:R#K5 says that if someone says that they find a redirect useful, they probably do. In particular, these shortcuts will be useful for future discussions of these proposals, which is something that certain editors above find important. I also think that some of the "theses" merit further discussion so there's that. Warudo (talk) 14:00, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At least delete ones that are not WP:THESISn. I don't see why anyone would use "WP:LETCOMPETE" as a shortcut to "#Enable competing articles". WP:THESISns are less problematic. — 魔琴 (Zauber Violino) [ talk contribs ] 14:40, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all I can't see why this essay should monopolise these generic wiki space redirects. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 08:19, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

L'AGEFI

L'AGEFI → List of newspapers in Switzerland#French language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:RETURNTORED, notable and article provides next to no information on it. See frwiki article [7]. Creator also a blocked sock. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom as potential article in the future --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:17, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ziltoid the Omniscient (crater)

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

The Snowball Fight

The Snowball Fight → Little Bear (book series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

too vague to be a redirect to a specific book series imo Shocksingularity (talk) 03:52, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I created that along with other Little Bear book redirects, without assessing each one individually. What if it were moved to "The Snowball Fight (book)"? Noel Tucker (talk • contribs) 14:55, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a problem because The Snowball Fight (book) would exist when its non-disambiguated form, The Snowball Fight, would not. Steel1943 (talk) 01:02, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If moving the redirect isn't an option, what if we add a notice to the top of Little Bear (book series) like this:

Noel Tucker (talk • contribs) 23:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural heritage of the Nation

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

A metamorfosis

A metamorfosis → The Metamorphosis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Aragonese(?) language title. Fails D8. — Hydrogenation (talk) 01:32, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If it fails D8, then it fails D8. Simple as. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:10, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Next British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election

Next British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election → 2018 British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as political party no longer exists under this name (barely exists as is), so there won't be another BC Liberal Party leadership election Epluribusunumyall (talk) 18:15, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to BC United or delete. Presumably, someone will replace Kevin Falcon as BC United leader at some point by leadership election or some other process. The future of the party is unknown, as is its name. The ballot name of BC United remains "BC United (formerly BC Liberal Party)".[8] Also, BC Liberal Party, BCL, and BCLP remain registered alternate names for the party.[9] This means no other party can claim the "Liberal" name for at least 10 years per Elections BC rules. Since the party was known as some variation of the BC Liberals or Liberal Party of BC for most of its 122 years, its recent disastrous name change is not reason alone to delete this redirect. There are others though.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

床

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

I tried PRODing this page, but the PROD was contested by Eva UX. I still think this page (now redirect) should be deleted. Tokonoma is only one use of this character, and an extremely obscure one that I have not been able to verify to any sources (not even Wiktionary!). In every language that uses this character, its primary meaning is "bed". Deleting this redirect would take readers who search for this character to the search results [10], where a link to Wiktionary is prominently featured on the top left. This is the best option for readers, who I am certain are overwhelmingly looking for the meaning of "床", not some obscure abbreviation of a phrase in which it is used. Toadspike [Talk] 13:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per above. Oreocooke (talk) 15:56, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Tokonoma is only one use of this character."--->Restore DISAMBIGUATION page then. (it had 4-5 entries before the nominator him/herself removed other entries, leaving but the one associated with the current target....). See page history, and this version (which can obviously be improved). Also, this type of disambiguation pages is pretty standard, please see Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles. Either a DISAMB is needed, or a redirect seems warranted and helpful. I cannot see how deleting the information could be "the best option for the readers". Especially if the wiktionary link is STILL in the disambiguation page...(And it was there; again see old version mentioned!) --- E.UX 16:16, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping! --- E.UX 16:19, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed three entries because they violated WP:FORRED and WP:NOTDICT. All three of those entries simply defined this character as "bed" or similar, which I absolutely think is something readers should be told, just in a way that complies with our policies and our purpose as an encyclopedia. Toadspike [Talk] 20:47, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I always thought the essay FORRED [it is technically not obvious that an essay can be violated, but never mind] was about pages that are redirects not about given entries in a disambiguation pages. And I don't think that NOTDICT applies to the presence of information inside a disambiguation page that contains otherwise useful entries (rather again, to articles themselves) but maybe I am wrong; that policy certainly does not forbid to have a link to the Wiktionary inside a disambiguation page, which was the case. Anyway, retarget to Toko (disambiguation) seems to be a good compromise. --- E.UX 21:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The other uses on the dab incarnation failed MOS:DABMENTION, whereas the redirect's target does define the term. Lacking any other target, the redirect is right where it should be. Paradoctor (talk) 16:36, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to toko (disambiguation) and add tokonoma per Mycetae. In my search bubble, searching for 床 isn't overly helpful, with the suggestions particularly not. Paradoctor (talk) 18:30, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Search "isn't helpful" because it's an extremely common character that usually means bed or couch and that appears in numerous compounds. We of course wouldn't redirect to bed or couch per WP:FORRED. I don't think we want to create dab pages for random Chinese characters; I was surprised to see we have 中 but this seems like a special case. Pointing to Toko (disambiguation) is only "helpful" in the very narrow sense that it sends readers somewhere specific, but the specific page misrepresents the character's typical usage and includes a bunch unrelated entries, which seems rather unhelpful. I know I'm the one who raised the Toko (disambiguation) possibility but the more I think about it the more wrong it seems… --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:42, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
misrepresents the character's typical usage Disagree. DUE is not a concern for dab pages, we have articles for that, if and when we do. The term is ambiguous, so we disambiguate.

"isn't helpful" because Well, that just supports my point. 🤷 Paradoctor (talk) 21:54, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DUE is not a concern for dab pages Sure, but we do concern ourselves with not misleading or unduly 'astonishing' readers. ~~I haven't struck my 'weak retarget' (yet…) but~~ It seems odd to send readers to a dab page that omits the most common uses of 床 and includes a bunch of entries that 床 never refers to. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:53, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what you're getting at. If it's a valid entry, then 床 does refer its subject. We got three of those. If you say there should be articles about some other meanings, either WP:SOFIXIT or ponder the wisdom of WP:WIP. All remaining cases can be covered with a Wiktionary link. "Surprise" has no seat on this table. 🤷 Paradoctor (talk) 01:58, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I meant 25 of the 27 entries at Toko (disambiguation), including several of the other Japanese entries, which have nothing to do with 床. And that we have articles on bed and couch, which is the primary meaning of 床, but those are appropriately not listed at the Toko dab page. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:22, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The furniture is a red herring, but I can see how someone could disagree about 床 being ambiguous with toko. No problem: 床 (disambiguation). The need to disambiguate has been demonstrated, leaves only the where. Paradoctor (talk) 04:25, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't think that is a good solution and continue to believe that a Wikipedia search is where we should send our readers. A redirect to "Toko" would give our readers one of several readings of this character in one of several languages in which it is used. It would be akin to directing our readers to a broom closet, when they're seeking to understand a vast palace. Unhelpful at best, misleading and frustrating at worst. Toadspike [Talk] 21:33, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is a common character whose primary meaning is different from the current target. The usage as synonymous with tokonoma has been disputed, although I see there are two references in the article. ~~Or weak retarget to Toko (disambiguation), where the character appears twice as a surname, and add tokonoma. I prefer to send to search where Wiktionary and various uses on en.wiki will appear.~~ --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:08, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:50, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate with tokonoma and the 2 proper names from Toko (disambiguation). CJK redirects have always been tricky to address, and this seems like a reasonable compromise to give readers a comprehensive but accurate overview of 床 on enwiki, with the option of going to Wikitionary if needed. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 18:22, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per VolatileAnomaly. Zarceational (talk) 02:58, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khmer Knong

Khmer Knong → Khmer people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Term not mentioned in article and I couldn't find a meaning for it through a search. Suonii180 (talk) 10:41, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I haven't been able to work out the meaning of this, but part of that is that it's never used in English-language contexts that I can see. Search results are almost all low view-count videos of groups of people dancing. Based on Google translate, this transliterates to កូនខ្មែរ in Khmer. There isn't an article at this title on that language's Wikipedia, and googling doesn't help me understand (many of the results are for YouTube videos tagged as comedy though if that helps anyone?). Whatever, this redirect is not going to help anybody searching on the English Wikipedia - someone who knows what this means (presumably) isn't going to find anything useful at the target and those who don't know what it means won't be any the wiser. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as creator of redirect: @Thryduulf Whatever Google Translate spat out is wrong, ខ្មែរខាងក្នុង (or the shortened form ខ្មែរក្នុង) is the correct way to spell the term in Khmer. (Tangentially, please do not use Google Translate for anything Khmer-related). In this context it means "Inland Khmer" or "Central Khmer". The term is really only used sparingly to distinguish what we would call Khmer people from Cambodia from Khmer Loeu "Northern/Upland Khmer" and Khmer Krom "Southern/Lowland Khmer".

Because it's used so sparingly and the fact that it's only relevant in context of Khmer Loeu and Krom is the reason why I decided to make the redirect instead of separate page. I'd like to note that while this is no means a reason to keep the redirect, there is now something similar with regards to the Lao people where "Lao Loum" redirects to the main Lao people article while Lao Soung and Lao Theung exist as seperate articles.

If not deleted, the redirect could instead be renamed to "Khmer Khangknong" or "Central Khmer people", the latter of which is similar to what is done with Northern Thai people. TansoShoshen (talk) 17:04, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, agreed with @TansoShoshen. Seems like too rare a term. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kuruluş: Orhan season 2

Kuruluş: Orhan season 2 → Kuruluş: Orhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kuruluş: Orhan season 3 → Kuruluş: Orhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kuruluş: Orhan season 4 → Kuruluş: Orhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kuruluş: Orhan season 5 → Kuruluş: Orhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The first season hasn't started airing yet and nothing about a 2nd (or later) season is mentioned in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:31, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

so delete per WP:TOOSOON then (and maybe also WP:CRYSTAL) Oreocooke (talk) 15:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They are meant for if users search for any other season it will redirect them. Yes not confirmed but those are surely upcoming seasons now there is no reason to delete those there is nothing as WP:TOOSOON because they aren't full article yet. They are just redirects to make search easier and if the season release which can be similar to the previous seasons of this continuous Ottoman historical series produced Mehmet Bozdağ such as Diriliş: Ertuğrul or Kuruluş: Osman. If releases anyone can edit those season pages and expand them more. Also its not WP:CRYSTAL those are just redirects. Now can you clarify why you want just redirects to be deleted? A$ianeditorz (talk) 17:10, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is no mention of seasons 2-5 in the target page, it would lead to readers being surprised. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:28, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't completely different topics if they search they will come on Kuruluş: Orhan where they can find which season till now is released. And you haven't answered why you want just redirects who are making search better for readers to be deleted? A$ianeditorz (talk) 19:42, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I see no reason for deletion of redirects.

Therealbey (talk) 09:42, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

that's... not how that works? redirects can be deleted just fine, it's not like wp:cheap is a universal unconditional policy that takes priority over all other things and prevents the deletion of all redirects. if you have opposition towards deleting those (which would then likely be a keep vote), that's cool and good, but you should make an argument towards that consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 22:51, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(I)support what @Consarn said Oreocooke (talk) 19:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

support asking what the actual argument is? consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:04, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

actually, it's probably worth a ping, so @Therealbey, what exactly did you mean by that? consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 13:18, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I agree with @MPGuy2824, it'd be too surprising to readers. If and when all those seasons come out, we can add the redirects. For now, we shouldn't delude readers accidentally. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete primarily as useless redirects that simply extend the name of the target without useful navigation. Also per nom. Respublik (talk) 19:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Ivo

Doctor Ivo → Doctor Eggman (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

ivo is a name that exists, so there's at least two other doctors with it (maybe even more!). still, it seems eggman is the only one who would fit this bill here, so consider this a weak nom consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 12:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:25, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Ivo, where Ivo Robotnik is listed -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 02:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This doesn't appear to be ambiguous. There's no one else identified as a doctor at the Ivo article, let alone known as Doctor Ivo. - Eureka Lott 22:39, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You missed Ivo Pitanguy who is clearly on the list. -- 65.93.183.109 (talk) 04:05, 29 September 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! 00:46, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per @65.93.183.109 - if there are two doctors, we might as well disambiguate. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Dr Ivo Robotnik (Dr Eggman) would be the primary doctor who has Ivo in their name. Sergecross73 msg me 00:46, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

October 1

Facebook&Instagram:

Facebook&Instagram: → Graduation2020 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Proposing to delete as too ambigious target per other probable usage, and also the wording structure. Respublik (talk) 23:34, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This was apparently the original name of the target when it was created back in July 2020, before it was moved to its current title by an admin. But I agree that it is too ambiguous, and it should've been suppressed while performing the move. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and CycloneYoris. And to the extent there are other plausible targets, there are WP:XY issues and this is a non-standard way to write "Facebook and Instagram". --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian Miku and Shiteyanyo

Brazilian Miku → Hatsune Miku (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Shiteyanyo → Hatsune Miku (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of either of these memes at the target. Though, I think the latter could be retargeted to List of Lucky Star albums#Lucky Star Re-Mix002 as a separate part of that album's full name. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 23:32, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Even if they aren't mentioned in the target page, they are popular memes within the fandom and likely search terms. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 00:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @ArtemisiaGentileschiFan. Brazilian Miku is a bit questionable since you could just search "Miku", but Shiteyanyo is a pretty specific term that I think should be kept. I wouldn't mind deleting the first but I'd rather keep the second. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Headache tablet

Headache tablet → Aspirin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The phrase "Headache tablet" is too vague to link directly to Aspirin IMO Shocksingularity (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: too vague. – 333 -blue at 23:19, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ as likely primary target unless there's a need to create a list, disambiguation or something. Even for the latter a hatnote would feel like appropiate solution. Respublik (talk) 23:41, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually while not a list of tablets, but could be redirected to List of investigational headache and migraine drugs as a search/sources used term. Respublik (talk) 00:16, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In the same sense, this redirect could also refer to Acetaminophen or Ibuprofen, which can also be used to treat headaches. Lists or disambiguation pages to mention these uses are inappropriate because none of these subjects are actually referred to by this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:55, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague. Could mean any anti-headache meds --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:17, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague and specifically oppose retargeting to List of investigational headache and migraine drugs. Not all headaches are migraines, there are many common treatments that are not investigational, and many of the entries on that list are not tablets or oral medications at all. Thus there is very poor overlap between the search term and the target that has been proposed. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:40, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
or Retarget to Headache#Management. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm partial towards Delete, but I like @Myceteae's idea to Retarget to Headache#Management. Retargeting to List of investigational headache and migraine drugs isn't that bad of an idea since it includes migraines and other headaches. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague, and inappropriate/unreasonable to disambiguate. We don't have headache pill, headache medicine, headache drug, etc.. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saba Nayagan (upcoming film)

Saba Nayagan (upcoming film) → Saba Nayagan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Released in 2023. No incoming links in the article space. Minimal page views. Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. If I could db-author it, I would. Wikishovel (talk) 21:44, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Katiedevi (talk) 21:48, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not an upcoming film anymore. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 23:35, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cadtro Daughter (Upcoming Film)

Cadtro Daughter (Upcoming Film) → Castro's Daughter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target film hasn't been released yet, but ... what an unlikely misspelling of "Castro" ... Cadtro??? Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Katiedevi (talk) 21:49, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Weirdly specific typo. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

State 1

State 1 → Delaware (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
State 2 → Pennsylvania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
State 3 → New Jersey (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
State 4 → Georgia (U.S. state) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
State 5 → Connecticut (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
State 6 → Massachusetts (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Refers to order of creation of US states. Can be ambiguous, as not all states are US states. I am bad at usernames (talk | contribs) 20:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ... and not all states have anything to do with geography, politics, or history. Steel1943 (talk) 21:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom and Steel. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, too Americentric. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 18:17, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom and above, vague terms indeed. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 18:29, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this doesn't seem to be discussed much in the articles and the precise terms don't appear at all and there are probably other states with these numbers just like in England just like 39 District 1s were created by The English Non-Metropolitan Districts (Names) Order 1973. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Honestly surprised that these were not already taken up be some other article. Gives off music album vibes. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 02:21, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Genus labeo

Genus labeo → Labeo dyocheilus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was presented in a previous revision of Faunal diversity in Pilibhit tiger reserve as if it were a common name for Labeo dyocheilus. That is just a misconception on the part of the editor who created the article. I guess the redirect could be retargeted to the article about the genus Labeo, but the redirect is miscapitalized and seems an unlikely search term. Plantdrew (talk) 20:26, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Redirects of the type 'genus X' are unnecessary and this is miscapitalized to boot. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:25, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:50, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indian river shada

Indian river shada → Gudusia chapra (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misspelling of Indian river shad, seems to have been created solely to link from Faunal diversity in Pilibhit tiger reserve (but spelling there has now been corrected) Plantdrew (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, obviously a corrected spelling error. Not a common misspelling - likely a typo, a slip of the fingers since 'a' and 'd' are close together. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No TV and no beer make Homer something something

No TV and no beer make Homer something something → Treehouse of Horror V (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
You go squish now! → Treehouse of Horror V (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

While the phrase "No TV and no beer make Homer go crazy" does appear in the target article, the word "something" does not appear in the target article. Also adding You go squish now! as another unmentioned redirect to the same article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 16:11, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. The redirect "No TV and no beer make Homer go crazy" should be made instead. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 20:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:56, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forbidden donut

Forbidden donut → Treehouse of Horror IV (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Forbidden doughnut → Treehouse of Horror IV (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The word "forbidden" does not appear in the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 16:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete as... vague!? even just in the context of the simpsons, this seems to have like 3 different meanings, one of which doesn't even involve homer (though two of them might have been in the same treehouse of horror epsiode). other results were mostly ai slop, so if deletion isn't on the menu, weak retarget to anus, and then delete anyway consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:11, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, 'Forbidden donut' does not return many searches related to the Treehouse of Horror, too vague. As per @consarn, I would not retarget to Anus, I've personally never seen anyone refer to it as such and if I were a Simpsons fan, looked this up and saw the Wikipedia Anus article pop up I'd be mortified. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it's pretty clear from the context of the article what forbidden donut refers to. The exact text doesn't need to appear in an article for it to be useful. I don't think we have any content that for another "forbidden donut". It's interesting difference in search results since if I search Google for forbidden donut (in a private window so a bit less customized for me), it's almost entirely Treehouse of Horror IV-related. Searching newspapers.com, there's not a ton of hits, 185 for donut and 113 for doughnut, and they're mostly articles about the Simpsons referencing it or college/HS group names that are clearly a reference to the Simpsons. Skynxnex (talk) 16:02, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sue Dokes

Sue Dokes → Treehouse of Horror III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mentions of this name at the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Extremely minor character with little screentime. This isn't a Fandom wiki. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 20:11, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Drunk Experiter --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:59, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mozambique's

Mozambique's → Mozambique (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unneeded redirect per similar nominations and deletions. No incoming links. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:57, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~, useful redirect that was created to facilitate linking at List of northernmost items. That entry has since been removed, but it does not make it less useful. If someone wishes to link in that way in the future this redirect would assist with that. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:13, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete's the way to go, especially since similar discussions have had similar results, establishing a consensus precedence. Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's not accurate. The only other country that has been nominated, Canada's, had a "no consensus" result: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 August 19#Canada's. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:13, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be the needle in the haystack of consensus as of recent. But yeah, that one was definitely an exception. Steel1943 (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete’s. I agree Canada's was an outlier. We shouldn’t be encouraging these. Piped links and other approaches facilitate linking the possessive in articles when needed. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:32, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why should they not be encouraged? There's nothing wrong with having multiple ways to link and their harm has still not been demonstrated. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:39, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They should be discouraged in articles because the usage is non-standard. The MOS is silent on this but it has been raised multiple times recently. I acknowledge that there are editors who find no fault with this usage. In looking at prior RFDs, but 'delete' has been the common outcome, followed by 'no consensus'. Discouraging this usage in article space would be consistent with other guidance on linking and redirects, although there is some inconsistency there, too. The question should be clarified at MOS:LINK. I've been hesitant to put forth an RFC because I'm not sure how best to formulate the question. There has already been some RFCBEFORE discussion on several pages. I think the question needs further clarification. Absent a wider RFC, we're left to assess these on our own. I, and others, find that this usage is not best practice and is better avoided in article space. I support discouraging this usage and cleaning up examples found in article space. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:33, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discouraging this usage in article space would be consistent with other guidance on linking and redirects. That's an interesting claim, so I dug into the MoS a bit more. It turns out there's actually already guidance on this, albeit in a footnote. Per MOS:PIPESTYLE: The simpler form is also preferred even if there is a redirect from the plural. For example, use [[apple]]s rather than the redirect [[apples]]. With that I'll withdraw my objection to deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:44, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, no wonder I didn't know about that footnote, it was just added a few weeks ago: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking#Plural pipestyle. I still don't think it's the best advice but I also feel like it's a mighty uphill climb to fight it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:50, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopia's

Ethiopia's → Ethiopia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unneeded redirect per similar nominations and deletions. No incoming links. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:28, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, useful redirect that was created to facilitate linking at Mount Amedamit. That it has since been copyedited out does not make it less useful, if someone wishes to link in that way in the future this redirect would assist with that. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:10, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete's the way to go, especially since similar discussions have had similar results, establishing a consensus precedence. Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete's per above. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:34, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete's why would you want the country article if you put in an apostrophe? Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...because it's not meant to be used for searching, it's to facilitate linking. In the example above, the usage was: Mount Amedamit is a mountain in Ethiopia's Amhara region. If you click that link, you are obviously trying to navigate to Ethiopia. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

typing [[Ethiopia]]'s would yield the same result 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That there are other ways to accomplish this task does not negate the validity of using a redirect, which is more intuitive for a lot of editors. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:12, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Four Mothers (upcoming film)

Four Mothers (upcoming film) → Four Mothers (2024 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Already released earlier this year in Ireland. (H/T 60th Chicago International Film Festival § Outlook, where it premiered last October.) Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:07, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep this is consistently getting a lot of views - over 200 in the 30 days prior to the nomination. The pattern of views has been pretty consistent since early April - views have not started tapering off, let alone finished doing that. This might be because there are still four internal links to the redirect from article space (and so links from external sources are also almost guaranteed). Thryduulf (talk) 13:25, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 15:15, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ralsei Smoking a Fat Blunt

Ralsei Smoking a Fat Blunt → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
GOD FUCKING damnit KRIS where the FUCK are we!? → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Doobie Ralsei → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
With you in the dark → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pluey → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Your taking too long → Deltarune#Chapter 4 – Prophecy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Deltagoon → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Waltz of Seccom Masada → Deltarune (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unmentioned. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 09:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. With no context of why one is redirected there, these redirects for non-notable whatevers are confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
retarget the second one to kris (deltarune) where it's mentioned, the last one to toby fox (while it's connected to deltarune in the same way as megalovania is to undertale, i refuse to elaborate, this one is actually more tied to yume nikki, i also refuse to elaborate), and then delete all but the second one per nom. yes, this means retargeting something and then immediately deleting it, but that's just the kind of stuff that happens when something is targeted based on recentism~ consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 18:22, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

nah, i don't think this needed a relist. it seems all but one of them would've been deleted, and that one could've just been renominated (if not retargeted). g3 deltagoon, by the way consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 15:06, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair, but I gave it a courtesy relist to give others the opportunity to discuss that redirect if desired. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:49, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget the second one, delete the others per consarn. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 15:47, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Wikipedia is not a meme directory. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:00, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget the second one to Kris (Deltarune) and delete the rest. I agree with consarn. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 12:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget #2, Delete the rest per @consarn. However, I would move Redirect #2 to be formatted/capitalised as "God FUCKING DAMMIT Kris where the FUCK are we", the same as it is in the Kris (Deltarune) article and the Polygon article used as reference. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 15:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i was just gonna create that one as well lol consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 15:39, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per above, including #2 which I don't think is a likely search term and is trivial on the page, sourced only to an editorial about someone's favorites memes. This is not how people are going to read about Deltarune. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:35, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Your taking too long and maybe Pluey, delete Deltagoon and Ralsei Smoking a Fat Blunt. No opinion on the others. (Oh and since consarn wouldn't elaborate, Waltz of Seccom Masada is a piece of Yume Nikki fan music Toby Fox made that's used in Deltarune in the secret egg rooms. no clue if that's mentioned in any sources) Ringtail Raider (talk) 02:11, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment while consarn refused to elaborate on why Waltz of Seccom Masada / man theme is more related to yume nikki, i will not refuse. it (and the 8 bit version / mancountry) comes from a thing titled "made up yumme nikkis" Oreocooke (talk) 02:32, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
actually i lied this isnt entirely a comment delete deltagoon as unworthy Oreocooke (talk) 02:32, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:TRUMPOTA

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

List of Saban Films

List of Saban Films → Saban Films#Filmography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The redirect may not be useful as it was moved to the correct title before its contents were merged into the target indicated. I calling for deletion! Intrisit (talk) 13:30, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. At worst, it's a helpful and possibly unambiguous {{R from incorrect name}}. Odds of readers being confused when reaching this redirect's current target is virtually nonexistent. I'm "weak" since there could potentially be another list of films related to "Saban" (such as a list of films by a subsidiary), and if so the redirect would be ambiguous ... but I have not been successful at finding any such other list. To clarify, do not delete. Steel1943 (talk) 17:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It took me a moment to figure out what the error is even supposed to be here. While List of Saban Films films or possibly List of Saban films would be more accurate, the redirect is entirely plausible. Of course, dabify or re-nominate if it turns out this is ambiguous. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bassam Adeel Jaleel

Bassam Adeel Jaleel → Football Association of Maldives (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

He's no longer the head of the Maldivian football association so I don't see this redirect being useful. Unilandofma^Talk 12:49, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the article doesn't mention that he's no longer the head currently, and there seems to be some controversy regarding leadership. It would make sense to redirect anyone searching him to this article. Even if he's no longer the head (which does seem to be the case based on a cursory search), his actions and participation are relevant to the article. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:40, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thameslink and Great Northern

Thameslink and Great Northern → Govia Thameslink Railway (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Could refer to GTR (current target), Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise, Thameslink Southern Great Northern (future GTR operator from 2026) or Thameslink (disambiguation) (maybe even Great Northern (disambiguation)?. I would note that this redirect used to be an article until 2018 which was then merged to GTR via a merge discussion, so I'm against deleting the redirect to preserve the page history. JuniperChill (talk) 12:28, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and add hatnotes to the franchise. The current operator seems to be the primary topic for this exact pairing, but the franchise is not implausible. The others are just partial title matches that can be found from the current article easily enough. Thryduulf (talk) 13:11, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israel/Palestine

Israel/Palestine → Israeli–Palestinian conflict (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Israeli-palestine → Israeli–Palestinian conflict (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not just mean Israeli–Palestinian conflict, can also refer to other term that are closely related to Israel and Palestine A1Cafel (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Israel–Palestine relations. A1Cafel, did you search for alternative targets before nominating? -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, like Israeli–Palestinian peace process, Israel-Palestinian Authority Border, etc. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Israel–Palestine relations. Seems sensible. Israel/Palestine could also refer to the geographic region but the ‘relations’ article is a good starting point. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:38, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget as per above. I agree with @Tavix and @Myceteae, Israel–Palestine relations seems most sensible and is likely what the majority of searches for those keywords would refer to rather than the region, peace process or border. It's a good general article. Drunk Experiter (Kanni, she/her) (talk) 20:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiridashi (knife)

Kiridashi (knife) → Knife#Tools (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

mentioned in passing and linked in kiridashi, but the mention is unsourced. you'd think that's where it ends, but my suggestion will actually be to return to red, since i found a couple results. if needed, i can leave my findings here, but there's every chance they'll end up being pretty underwhelming consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:38, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

I've added a {{cn}} at the target. Japanese carpentry § Tools is a better target, though the source there is an unverified youtube channel. Jay 💬 06:01, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Japanese carpentry § Tools per Jay. I've added a citation for kiridashi knives to the page which is at least better than the YouTube video. Katiedevi (talk) 22:06, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pumpkin Hill

Pumpkin Hill → Sonic Adventure 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention at target; there are Pumpkin Hill, New York and Pumpkin Hill Creek Preserve State Park. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:15, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - for the record, it's the name of an area in the game, though, that said, I'm not sure it's a particularly likely search term either. Sergecross73 msg me 00:19, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak sia-ify, i guess. i'm not entirely sure if two-entry sias are a thing that can happen, and if this pumpkin hill can be mentioned in passing, but if either case is true, so be it consarn _{(approach me in the alley) (creep)} 01:12, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(I am also not sure why exactly this would be an SIA and not a disambiguation page, but I am not an expert at recognising SIAs either. I tagged pages like 1984 in Korea (two entries) as SIAs but some people were arguing that I was wrong.) 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 10:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
to be fair, there was a reason i specifically suggested that... but to be unfair, i forgot what it was. whoops? consarn _{(knock knock it's knock knockles)} 20:58, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:23, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i'm hearin' someone sayin' "BITCH YOU-"

it had to be the wind 'cause the bean wasn't there

for what it's worth, i'll note that the sonky hegdog zone seems to be the primary topic... but not in any way that would actually affect this rfd, from the looks of it consarn _{(cleanse yourself) (no)} 11:14, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unhealthy narcissism

Unhealthy narcissism → Narcissistic personality disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unhealthy narcissism is unclear in regards to what exactly it refers to. It currently redirects to Narcissistic personality disorder, which is indeed a possible target; however, it is fully possible to conceptualize manifestations of "general" narcissism unhealthy. Furthermore, NPD and narcissism are not the same, and NPD is not merely a severe subtype of narcissism, but a specific personality disorder in categorical models (in which PDs are understood as distinct entities). There is arguably the possible for non-PD narcissism to still be unhealthy in one way or another, even perhaps within the course of other mental health pathology or PD which technically does not meet criteria for NPD specifically. As this redirect is not utilized in articles anyway, I propose its deletion. All reliable non-ambiguous sources will specify whether NPD is the specific matter, and thus it shall also be referred to as such on Wikipedia. BlockArranger (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the current target is inappropriate. There is also the article Healthy narcissism; the word unhealthy appears only once on the page. "Unhealthy narcissism" appears in sources I found online but I'm not sure whether this is appropriate to add to an existing article. It might be synonymous with Narcissism#Destructive levels of narcissism I don't know enough to make that call. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:34, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We actually have "Destructive narcissism", which redirects there. Perhaps unhealthy narcissism should merely be put in relationship to healthy narcissism...? In general, several of these concepts related to narcissism probably exist largely due to the hype about narcissism in popular culture, which does not reflect the systematic approach that is to be utilized in Wikipedia. BlockArranger (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget to Narcissism#Levels for now. Healthy narcissism would be my second choice. I'm not familiar enough with this area to know what content might be added to either target to address "unhealthy narcissism" more directly but I'm confident that NPD is too narrow. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that levels is the better of the two for now, so that individuals who use the redirect get the context for unhealthy manifestations of narcissism, rather than merely the opposite, healthy narcissism. This can be discussed again if anyone thinks the solution is inadequate. BlockArranger (talk) 08:21, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

California Sober

California Sober → F-1 Trillion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There's some history in logs, but there appear to be two songs by this name — one in Dancing with the Devil... the Art of Starting Over and another in F-1 Trillion. Unclear which of these, if either, is the primary topic or if this should be dabified. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If DABified, there is also a Billy Strings/Willie Nelson song by the same title from 2023 that was nominated for Grammy Award for Best American Roots Song, although I cannot figure out a good article to incorporate that into the DAB. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 13:16, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate. I started a draft disambiguation page below the redirect. There's a mention of the California Sober method at Recovery model, but it's not defined there, plus there's also a draft article at Draft:California sober. - Eureka Lott 15:25, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Rock Star

Being a Rock Star → Lemon Demon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target, but a different song with this title is listed at Yoon Do-hyun... 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:11, 23 September 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, ✗plicit 00:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Yoon Do-hyun#Discography --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 30

Gdpppp

Gdpppp → Purchasing power parity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The term GDP PPP is mentioned at the target but without the space I don't think that it's a plausible search term. Suonii180 (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. GDPPPP is a perfectly plausible initialism for Gross Domestic Product Purchasing Power Parity. People often enter all lowercase in place of all caps in search and since Wiki always capitalizes the first letter of an article/redirect name, gdpppp becomes Gdpppp. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:07, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Myceteae. It's also worth noting I'm seeing quite a few uses of GDPppp, but as Google is case insensitive it isn't possible to find the relative prevalence of capitalisations. All lowercase is definitely a plausible search term though. Thryduulf (talk) 12:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above comments.—Alalch E. 22:39, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The fact it's so short and easy to type is a benefit to readers. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all of above. It's a great initialism with four repeated letters. Zarceational (talk) 02:59, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Monday

Orange Monday → 2025 stock market crash (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The term isn't mentioned in the article and while a search shows that the term was used at the time there is an Orange Monday section at Red Week (Netherlands). Suonii180 (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Red Week (Netherlands)#Orange Monday. The redirect was most likely created to make fun of Trump. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Red Week (Netherlands)#Orange Monday, agreed with @Mikeycdiamond - it looks like a D3. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Monster hunting

Monster hunting → Cryptozoology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not sure where this needs to target, but cryptozoology is not the best fit. There are a variety of games and other media titles "Monster Hunter", so maybe this should target the dab page? I had hoped there was maybe an article for the Van Helsing-type of fantasy stock character that has evolved into franchises such as the Witcher, but I don't see such a target. Thoughts? TNstingray (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete in absence of good enough targets for a dab. even the current target disagrees with this being a redirect to it, as cryptids aren't inherently monsters and zoology isn't inherently hunting. also oppose retargeting to monster hunter (disambiguation) and monster hunter for the same reason, as there's surprisingly little info on the act of hunting itself consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:02, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
should probably also have mentioned that monsters aren't inherently cryptids either, and hunting isn't inherently zoology. oh well, i think people would've figured out on their own that wrestling with bears while naked and covered in honey would toss a wrench into this redirect. for legal reasons, this reply is actually entirely serious consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per consarn, unless there is a target that is actually called 'monster hunting'. Definitely do not keep. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:10, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't entirely oppose retargeting to Monster Hunter, but realistically, Delete is the right call. Cryptozoology as the Redirect seems very out of place! Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:31, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voiceless bilabial approximant

Voiceless bilabial approximant → Voiceless bilabial fricative (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

See this. BodhiHarp 17:33, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore This seems out of process to me. The page was only two days ago turned into a redirect and is now being nominated for deletion at RfD. I think it would be best to discuss at AfD restored to this revision of Voiceless bilabial approximant. Per WP:BLAR, the redirect was seemingly contested regardless, so it should not have been able to have been turned back into a redirect without a discussion of sorts. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:43, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging (The Young Prussian—Kwamikagami) as involved editors so they can be aware of this RfD to give their opinions if they so choose Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: I missed there was a WP:BLAR of this also in August. Pinging editor of that to inform of RfD as well. Cheers! Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete, and consider this contesting the restoration. regardless of whether or not the source was falsified (it seems to at least be real), it was still one source for what seems to be the least consequential part of the entire article (wow, this concept comes from european spanish?), and doesn't actually seem to match up with whatever is in the source in the first place (it's only got one instance of the word "approximant", which isn't in the context of where the concept came from or what it actually is, and doesn't seem to refer to the blar's subject anyway), with the rest of the content having nothing to its name. if someone wants something like that in mainspace, i don't even think that's a thing that can happen, as they can't really restore a great big pile of nothing and call it a day. if someone wants that to be taken to afd, it'll likely just result in this rfd being host to the same ol' discussion again and then the hopefully non-ensuing afd closing as delete (possibly after having the same discussion there as well, here's a random link for no reason), so let's not even humor the idea unless someone has sources to present (i found this?) consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:28, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will freely admit that I don't know a whole ton about linguistics, so I am far from the best judge of whether or not what is written there should be in mainspace, so I'll take your word for it that it shouldn't be. I just get an odd feeling about this being turned into a redirect and so promptly nominated, but I looked at the AfD and Lunamann's WP:SNOW argument there is compelling. I'm reconsidering my !vote, but I do not think I will strike it yet for now. I will revisit in a bit if there has been more discussion and potentially strike or change it. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 20:37, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
don't worry, i know almost nothing about linguistics myself, only about when an article is especially Not Good. as is, having one source and not even using it properly doesn't strike me as particularly likely to survive an afd

as for how quickly it was taken to rfd, a two day margin seems almost reasonable. not like it was blanked and immediately taken to rfd or anything like that. but i will note that the nom is one of the people who initially restored it, so this might just be procedural consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:43, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

yes, the source is real, and presumably a rs, but it doesn't say what the article claimed it said - that's what i meant by falsified — kwami (talk) 03:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
truth be told, i'm almost willing to chalk it up to an accident with this procedural restoration stuff. of course, this means the content would've been completely unsourced otherwise, which wouldn't make the case much better, but shh consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As a redirect, this is not a valid redirect. As a former article, the content must not be restored because it is thoroughly policy non-compliant. Anyone who would willfully restore such content for whatever reason would be acting irresponsibly. No one should do this bad thing for some procedural reason. This leaves deletion as the only option. If the BLAR is contested with a good faith rationale on the merits of the content (not the case currently) during this RfD, then the content should be restored and this RfD closed with no action. An AfD will surely be started then. But now, there is no place for an AfD and this RfD is a fully adequate venue.—Alalch E. 11:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right communism

Far-right communism → Communism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Term isn't mentioned in the article and I couldn't find a definitive term through a search or a suitable alternative retarget. Suonii180 (talk) 16:32, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — there is no such article.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Not mentioned in the article, probably because it is a fringe viewpoint's description. Yue🌙 23:58, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to National Bolshevism. National Bolshevism is essentially far-right communism, so it should probably be fine as a target. I think syncretism would be too vague as there are non far-right communist syncretists. If this is considered to be too specific or unhelpful, deletion is fine as well. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 13:57, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 16:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to National Bolshevism. Appopriate target.—Alalch E. 17:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think Retarget to National Bolshevism is the best move here. It is far-right socially, and economically communist. I don't know what else it could refer to, as regular communism isn't far-right. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:34, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inner derivation

Inner derivation → Interior product (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

May refer to Lie algebra#Derivations (also described at Differential algebra#Lie algebra). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 15:07, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 16:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. There is no primary topic (is that correct, User:1234qwer1234qwer4). Two entries: Interior product & Lie algebra#Derivations. —Alalch E. 22:14, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate seems appropriate if it can refer to 2 articles, per nom. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Water problems

Water problems → Water pollution (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrectly targets a type of pollution when "water problems" denotes water problems and is not limited to pollution in specific, as one type of a problem with water. Other articles about water problems are Water scarcity, including Drought, Overdrafting, Peak water; Water conflict, Water inequality, ... Water can be unsafe because it wasn't properly treated, it can be of low quality, etc. —Alalch E. 15:58, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as noted it is ambiguous and the target doesn't mention this term anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:36, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vague nonsense. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, vague term with no suitable target at the moment. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 07:45, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Crouch, Swale. Thryduulf (talk) 12:33, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete as vague, but if it's decided Water issues is retargeted to Water#Effects on human civilization then so should this. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:36, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Water issues

Water issues → Water issues in developing countries (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrectly targets a "developing countries" topic when "water issues" denotes water issues and has nothing to do with so-called developing countries in specific. All societies deal with issues of water use and water issues. Should target Water#Effects on human civilization (this section is really "Water and humans") which lists the water issues. Articles about water issues include Water supply, Irrigation, Sanitation, Water scarcity, Water conservation, Water security, Water quality, Water safety, Water pollution, ... —Alalch E. 15:44, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. Even broader than “water problems”. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:53, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Myceteae Maybe you'll be interested in User:Alalch E./Issues —Alalch E. 23:22, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting indeed. Many issues to consider. I'm pretty active on RfD and interested to see how these get resolved. My initial thought is that these all require case-by-case determinations. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:51, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, vague term with no suitable target at the moment. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 07:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should probably go somewhere as it would seem odd to have the descriptive title about it in developing countries but to have the base title as a red link but given we don't have other articles dealing with weater issues it might be better to just leave it as is or just delete until a broad article or better broad target exists. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:18, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Crouch, Swale I offered a target in the nomination: Water#Effects on human civilization. And Water has a lot of elements of a broad-concept article. —Alalch E. 21:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK that might be the best target at least for now. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:02, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any problem having an article with a descriptive title like Water issues in developing countries without having a corresponding article or redirect for the short title Water issues. The full title has a reasonably defined scope but the short title is too vague. I don't see a title like Water issues in developing countries and assume it covers everything that could possibly be classified as a "water issue". --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete as vague, but Retargeting to Water#Effects on human civilization is a decent option. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

XfD

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

Featherless biped

Featherless biped → Plato#Featherless biped (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article, retarget to Names for the human species#In philosophy -1ctinus📝🗨 14:21, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget This was removed from Plato around May. It could usefully point to Diogenes instead, but it's not mentioned there either. If this is the best target we have, then move it. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Maybe also add mention of Diogenes to that article just to get the WL in? Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 23:42, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Andy Dingley. I wasn't familiar with this terminology but it sounds like coverage of this could plausibly fit in multiple articles. So, no prejudice to retargeting in the future if this topic finds a better home, but Names for the human species#In philosophy discusses the terminology and the coverage makes sense there. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:55, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget. Names for the human species#In philosophy seems like the best option currently. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conscience issues

Conscience issues → Conscience vote (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Should not target Conscience vote (a niche topic about the Westminster system) and should rather target Conscience. However, it might as well be deleted, as the term is very ambiguous. Conscience issues might be the issues of freedom of conscience in a society, they might be an ethical dilemma, they might be a guilty conscience, i.e., guilt, ... —Alalch E. 14:12, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague; weak retarget to Conscience as distant second choice. The first thing I thought of was the ‘issue’ of healthcare workers refusing to provide certain services like birth control that conflict with their personal moral ‘conscience’. Just about everything having to do with conscience could be called a conscience issue. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 13:29, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: So ... the redirect Conscience (magazine) exists, and magazines have "issues", but ... the redirects target, Catholics for Choice, doesn't mention the subject other than in the "External links" section. In other words, there could be a claim this redirect is ambiguous, but the redirect Conscience (magazine) itself currently has ... issues. 🤣 Steel1943 (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)/Archive

Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)/Archive → James Carter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Yet another unnatural disambiguation page subpage; HOWEVER this one has a lot of edit history and was previously RfD'd (or at least Tamzin briefly tried to) back in 2022, so I'm not sure what to do with this one Duckmather (talk) 16:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the page history needs to be retained somewhere, as the contents was merged into James Carter. I haven't worked out why it was moved though. The closest logical title I've found that is available is Carter, Jimmy (disambiguation) although I can foresee some objections to that. Thryduulf (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move without redirect to Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)Jimmy Carter (disambiguation), possibly deleting the content at Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)Jimmy Carter (disambiguation) that doesn't need to be retained first, to retain the edit history and put it at the best applicable title. Either way, the title of the nominated redirect is not a helpful or plausible search term/phrase, and the redirect's current title should be "red/deleted". Steel1943 (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:37, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't say this often, but ... I'm not sure why this was relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess let's try this: @Thryduulf: Your thoughts on my proposed resolution? Steel1943 (talk) 21:03, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In an ideal world it wouldn't be my first choice, but it's not sufficiently far from ideal to be worth preventing a consensus over. I guess that makes me a weak support. Thryduulf (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should expand on my reasoning here. I don't regard deleting a page less significant editing history to make way for one with a more significant history as particularly great, and certainly don't want to encourage its use in situations where unambiguously plausible and useful titles have never existed. However, in this specific case pretty much every other such title is already extant and also has significant history so it's a least worst sort of scenario. Thryduulf (talk) 12:49, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move without redirect per above to preserve the edit history. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:29, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CPI

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Pokal

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

no demonstrated affinity with german, or the only thing the term could refer to (even if limited in use to german). used to be a dab and then a stub, but they both had nothing of substance consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 12:12, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep – given the prominence of DFB-Pokal it's very reasonable a reader might want to know what "Pokal" means (there's your affinity). However many people will be looking for DFB-Pokal itself. J 947 ‡ ^edits 22:19, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per the above "weak keep" comment, this seems like a case where the subject of this redirect is potentially a standalone subject with German affinity (WP:REDLINK) exclusive from the current target. Otherwise, weak retarget to DFB-Pokal. Steel1943 (talk) 22:48, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:33, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A single event called "German Cup" in English doesn’t establish special affinity for trophy. WP is not a bilingual dictionary. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 06:07, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Market to Market

Market to Market → Iowa PBS (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. Lavalizard101 (talk) 13:13, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this was previously mentioned, but removed by Mvcg66b3r in this November 2024 edit citing WP:NOTTVGUIDE, a rationale I disagree is relevant. The Iowa PBS programme is by far and away the primary topic for this search term and a superficial look at google suggests it's very likely notable enough for a mention somewhere and possibly (although I'd need to look in more detail to be sure) even for it's own article. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A list of programming could have at least been cited to a Local Content and Service Report or something, as I tend to do when I write articles of this type. The list was a bit long and needed trimming, but programming with sourcing and coverage should have been included. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 01:53, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep & restore mention. The content could be revised. It appears that Market to Market was especially noteworthy. Perhaps a more detailed description (even 2–3 sentences) of this and other flagship original programming would be more encyclopedic. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Detroit People Mover (Airport)

Detroit People Mover (Airport) → ExpressTram (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The term "Detroit People Mover" does not refer to the subject of target article, the ExpressTram people mover at Detroit Metropolitan Airport, but rather to the Detroit People Mover, a completely distinct and unrelated rail system. The term "Detroit People Mover" is not used in common language or published sources to refer to the ExpressTram, and as such, this redirect is likely to cause confusion between the two systems. 42-BRT (talk) 06:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As great as it would be if the People Mover was extended all the way to Romulus, that is not happening, thus making this an incredibly confusing redirect. It does not help the reader. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 15:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a very plausible search term for someone who doesn't know/doesn't remember how the people mover at Detroit airport is branded. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there isn't currently any mention of the phrase at ExpressTram. I've added an about template to Detroit People Mover to cover any confusion people may have. Tduk (talk) 20:14, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:52, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per other deleters. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 06:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing for readers, Delete. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 22:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Irrational fear (unknown)

Irrational fear (unknown) → Fear#Uncertainty (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

what is the disambiguator supposed to be doing? labeling the cause of the fear as unknown? labeling the fear itself as unknown to the person feeling it? this confusion makes it implausible as a target to #uncertainty imo consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:35, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and fix links to this strange title. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:55, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As shown in the irrational fear dab page, the qualifier for this redirect's title just disambiguates between the usage of the term "irrational fear" to describe several classifications of phobias and the usage of the term to refer specifically to the fear of the unknown. So it's not there either for "labeling the cause of the fear" or for "labeling the fear itself as unknown to the person feeling it". It's just there to qualify the phrase "irrational fear" as explained at its target article section. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 20:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...so it's an improper, grammatically incorrect, unnecessary disambiguator created so a dab doesn't need to do piped links? i really don't see what warrants its existence consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 22:24, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What warrants its existence is that it aids readers to find an important meaning of "irrational fear" as described at its target: "Fear of the unknown or irrational fear is caused by..." Please help me understand your words. How is this disambiguator "improper"? and why does a brief, concise qualifier have to be grammatically correct? P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 10:03, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

oops, i thought this was sent before

you know the functions you say it's serving can be served just as well by a piped link (or even a standard one), as opposed to an ambiguous disambiguator, right?

and i say it's ambiguous for a reason, as on top of my previous argument that the disambiguator itself could mean different things, you've provided examples of other stuff it could target, and even then, the dab is just ptms of two redirects. the current target also seems to conflate fear of the unknown with irrational fear, which is... not exactly correct per the rest of the article, but that's probably besides the point consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

as an aside, results seemed to primarily conflate the term with phobias, and mostly in the context of being too busy being scared to determine what a problem is, as opposed to not being able to determine it (whatever the reason may be). this at best means that i think it should be retargeted to phobia#mechanism, but in practice, doesn't make up for how the title itself is, as scientists say, "totes lame-o brah" consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:42, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that explanation! I still don't understand your reasoning, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. There is nothing improper about this redirect, and the qualifier does not have to be grammatically correct. If I had used "(the unknown)" when I created the redirect, then it might have been a little better, but I think the article "the" is unnecessary because readers will associate "unknown" with the ambiguous phrase "irrational fear", and they will understand that if they click on that link they will be taken to a description of the traditional, long-time "irrational fear _{of the} unknown". It's just a cheap little search-term redirect that helps readers of Wikipedia who are searching for "just what is an 'irrational fear'?". So I think it's one of my better more helpful creations. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 09:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 03:11, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We may as well make Irrational fear (unicorns) at that point too. I'd also say delete the other pointless disambiguation, and retarget "Irrational fear" itself to Phobia. It's telling that the two disambiguators are not a parallel construction. One reads that "Phobia" is a type of irrational fear, while the other reads that it's supposed to be an irrational fear of the unknown, or something. This isn't how disambiguators are supposed to work. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:50, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the Irrational fear (unknown) entry from the dab, and it's not a dab any more. It may be retargeted to Phobia, and so the capitalized Irrational Fear with it. Jay 💬 04:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

maybe a little more to the point, it could also refer to irrational fear in unicorns. in the same vein, this redirect could refer to unknown things feeling irrational fear, irrational fear caused by unknown things, irrational fear with an unknown cause (which itself can apply to multiple perspectives), and a couple more things i'm forgetting about. hence, my argument that this disambiguator is itself ambiguous, as it only really disambiguates from rational fear of the unknown (whatever that would be)

that said, unicorns are pretty scary. i hear some of them come from this mythical place in the northern corner of the uk, and may or may not have invented scrumpy, explosions, and decapitation consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:42, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's unclear what the disambiguator "(unknown)" is meant to represent. Steel1943 (talk) 19:18, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grunt rush

Grunt rush → Rush (video games) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hydra rush → Rush (video games) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Four pool rush → Rush (video games) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Tower rush → Rush (video games)#Variations on the rush (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Goblin tactics → Rush (video games) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gatecrasher (Diablo 2) → Rush (video games) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"Grunt rush" appears to be a specific game (which might feature this tactic); the others are variations of the tactic. None are mentioned at the target – some have been removed in 2016 –, and even for those that are mentioned elsewhere there do not seem to be viable target alternatives. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 19:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rush lists Starcraft as its example, Starcraft was effectively a Sci Fi sequel to Warcraft 2. Grunt rush predates Zerg Rush, but at its time Warcraft 2 was the genre defining real time strat with online multi-player. I got pinged so I might have made this redirect, I vote keep Grunt Rush as redirect to Rush and ideally mentioned Wacraft 2 in that article.

Mathiastck (talk) 21:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

First Luv

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

Frérèche

Frérèche → Land tenure#Modes of ownership and tenure (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Frereche → Land tenure#Modes of ownership and tenure (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Without mention, these redirects look nothing more than WP:FORRED issues; in fact, the search for "Frérèche" on the English Wikipedia returns primarily results on the French Wikipedia. (When did the English Wikipedia search function start returning results for Wikipedias in different languages? That's news to me.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redir creator here: I get what you're saying. For interest, frérèche has a Wiktionary entry: tl;dr it's brothers jointly owning real property (more specifically, in the context of medieval French law). It doesn't seem to me to be something that would warrant its own article, and I wasn't sure about a soft redir to WT. The thing is land tenure is kinda a mess and needs overhauling and a lot of expansion, and that country list probably ought be split into its own list article. I wouldn't mind adding a mention of frérèche in the article but I'm uncertain where it should go exactly. Thoughts? I'm fine with whatever outcome, just want to help fill in stuff needing coverage. --Slowking Man (talk) 04:25, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. Slowking Man's comments suggest that this is a case for WP:REDLINK. Thryduulf (talk) 14:13, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf, Slowking specifically says that it doesn't seem to warrant its own article, I don't see how WP:REDLINK follows? Rusalkii (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep if content is added, otherwise delete. I would defer to Slowking Man or another editor familiar with this topic as to whether and where frérèche should be mentioned. If it fits in one of the types listed, or warrants inclusion under #Other, I would add it there. It sounds like it might be notable enough for inclusion. However, it is not a synonym for Land tenure but rather a specific type in a specific context. Thus, linking without explanation won't clarify the meaning for readers with partial familiarity and risks misleading readers who have encountered the term elsewhere to thinking it has a broader meaning. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Southpaw Regional Wresting

Southpaw Regional Wresting → WWE Network#Former shows (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is a misspelled redirect while the correctly-spelled name isn't even a redirect itself. Charles Essie (talk) 02:19, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:17, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indent Test

Indent Test → Indentation hardness (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I had just retargeted this redirect from Hardness to its current target, but I don't even think that's right, though it is probably better than the previous target. Should this just be completely deleted? Steel1943 (talk) 23:33, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. What's your rationale for thinking it's not right Steel1943? I like the initial retarget you made, I think it's taking the reader to a particular kind of indent test which could be what they're looking for. I'm curious, what made you change your mind? Katiedevi (talk) 04:42, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
different definitions of "indent", i'll assume. results seemed accordingly torn between tests related to those meanings, and even the ones that were related to material indentation seemed to be more concerned with the length or shape of any given indent

...and also something about bread and/or pregnancy consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 15:52, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:07, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 29

Tandkräm

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

Toothpaste in Swedish. No particular affinity I can see / WP:FORRED Zzz plant (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:04, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 04:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FORRED. Steel1943 (talk) 17:12, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fights, Camera, Action!

Fights, Camera, Action! → 5 (British TV channel) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is an inappropriate redirect from a non-notable subject to an article about the broadcaster, without a mention. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:06, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EEx

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

Relist of a single redirect from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 22#Nesscap EDLC, nominated by 1234qwer1234qwer4, as the remaining 38 were unambigious deletes. I have copied over the discussion concerning specifically EEx below; pinging consarn, Steel1943, Oreocooke and Lenticel who all voted to delete the lot before the discussion below. Rusalkii (talk) 21:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget EEx to EEX as an alternative capitalization, delete the rest. Zarceational (talk) 01:09, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Thanks; maybe it should even be retargeted to Electrical equipment in hazardous areas as the only meaning with this capitalisation, but I don't have a too strong opinion on this. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:25, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

@Rusalkii: Your ping did not work, most likely because you had additional text after your signature in the same edit. When all else fails, I tend to mention/link all I ping in my respective edit summary for insurance. Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, thanks for letting me know. @Consarn, @Oreocooke, @Lenticel, @Zarceational, @1234qwer1234qwer4 Rusalkii (talk) 00:03, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per above. Thanks for the ping. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ɰ̃

ɰ̃ → Voiced velar approximant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target and it can be recreated when my article Draft:Nasal velar approximant is ready. BodhiHarp 20:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused why this request would even need to be made, when the old version of the page read #redirect [[Voiced velar approximant]], meaning it should have already been redirecting to the requested page and simply needed to be corrected to caps #REDIRECT. (not sure what I was on about here)

As for the article you are drafting, only 1 out of the 10 sources you have added to it is actually reliable, that being Vance (2008), which does mention a nasal dorso-velar approximant.

As for the rest, 3 of them are PHOIBLE, which itself is not a valid citation, its references must be checked and used; 3 of them are other WP pages; 1 of them is on a mirror wiki; 1 of them is from a random forum post; and 1 of them is from an incomplete dataset which also must have its referenced checked.

So I'd say keep ~~to correct the typo~~ and rather than make an entirely new page, just note it as a special occurrence in Japanese in Voiced velar approximant#Occurrence; not a separate section about a nasal approximant, just listed in the table with everyone else. oklopfer (💬) 22:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I realize now this implied a deletion and not a fixture, but the rest still stands, and I think it should just be fixed. oklopfer (💬) 02:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oklopfer It does not appear to be mentioned at the target.

Also, if there is a misunderstanding, I meant it is not mentioned at the target, and if my article gets accepted, this redirect can be recreated after being deleted per this discussion. BodhiHarp 03:40, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't think the article should be created to begin with, since it is only one reference for one language, it can simply be in the occurrences box as mentioned above on the page it is currently attempting to redirect to. oklopfer (💬) 03:43, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now it does appear at the target, as I have added inclusion of the occurrence based on the reference. oklopfer (💬) 02:38, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1.414213562373..., etc.

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 10 § 1.732050807568877... – delete

Implausibly long search terms. A similar one was deleted recently. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 04:44, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These are absurd. Nobody is going to (except as a joke) type 256 digits of these constants. On the other hand, so what? They also don't really cause any harm. –jacobolus (t) 04:54, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to vote keep here just to prevent these kinds of pointless discussions in the future, which are frankly a bigger problem than the original redirect. Cf. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 28 § c-Anomie-20241129024000-3.1415926535… –jacobolus (t) 05:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, just delete them all. FaroeFO (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment FaroeFO is the creator of all these redirects, but it is unclear whether @Jacobolus is recommending keeping meaning it is also unclear whether G7 applies. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. Zzz plant (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom and creator and recent similar RfD highlighted by the nom. The 2024 'no consensus' π RfD does not provide a rationale to keep these redirects. First, that high-participation discussion confirms that many editors dispute the appropriateness of this type of redirect. Second, π is the most well-known of these numbers which may be a reason some would argue that redirect is more plausible. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. So long as to be implausible search terms. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:18, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - they are decimal representations of the targets. Just because they are 256 digits does not make them incorrect (the 'real' value is infinitely long) and they are harmless. They also aid search functionality - without these redirects, searching the targets with arbitrary decimal points would not take the user to the correct location. Because of the existance of a 256 digit redirect, searching with 100 digits or 75 digits or 200 digits works as expected. Yes, it's a little ugly and unlikely to be used directly, but it is harmless, correct, and aiding expected functionality. BugGhost 🦗👻 16:53, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the 255 per the Pi consensus. Jay Cubby 16:42, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately keep per sleek argumentation by Bugghost. I have no prejudice against deletion as improbable usage even on the wiki searchbar, but I guess WP:Cheap wins out. Respublik (talk) 19:56, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: If the redirect for the square root of 3 was deleted, then why should these be kept? Different results for the exact same type of redirects don't make much sense to me. In my opinion, these are still unnecessarily long redirects unlikely to be searched. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 04:16, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, totally implausible. Contrary to what is stated above, searching with 75, 100, or 200 digits does not work (all three are red links). You have to autofill hundreds of numbers after to get to this title, which is not a good precedent imo. I don't think people type out an impossibly long list of numbers to get to their targets. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:44, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Together (upcoming film)

Together (upcoming film) → Together (2021 TV film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:UFILM. Target released 4 years ago, no alternative targets exist to point this redirect (see Together#Film). Steel1943 (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Meets WP:UFILM criteria. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence this is still being used to find the target. Thryduulf (talk) 12:14, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Master (upcoming film)

Master (upcoming film) → Master (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:UFILM. Target released over 3 years ago. Redirect gets minimal page views. Steel1943 (talk) 19:17, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Meets WP:UFILM criteria. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:47, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:03, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This one is not getting minimal page views (48 between 1 January and 28 September, 51 in the whole of 2024). The pattern of views is odd but consistent since at least 1 January 2023[11] with a mix of 0, 1 and 3 views a day with only very occasional days with 2 or 4 views. This redirect is very clearly being used for something but it's not clear what that something is. We don't have any articles about future films with this title and I've not been able to find that there are any we don't have articles about. So weak delete but as confusing and explicitly not per UFILM. Thryduulf (talk) 12:27, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barbershop haircut that costs a quarter

A barbershop haircut that costs a quarter → Newsies (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target does not mention any haircuts. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:46, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"comment": the redirect is oddly precise Oreocooke (talk) 21:49, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Reasonable as it's from a fairly famous meme, but retarget to Newsies (musical). A.Classical-Futurist (talk) 00:46, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that's just a retarget vote. also, it's unmentioned there consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:50, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete as unmentioned. results seemed to imply it's a popular meme (though simultaneously obscure enough that some of the first results would be ai slop of the piss filer variety), but we're not kym or tvtropes consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:53, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:ASTONISH. Any reader using this redirect for search is most likely looking for the meme and will be surprised when nothing shows up regarding its history/usage. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 02:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per last two and nominator. (For those wondering, this is a lyric from "King of New York".) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 03:35, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned national cricket teams

Chinese Taipei national cricket team → Asian Cricket Council#Members of ACC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dominican Republic national cricket team → Dominican Republic#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Georgia national cricket team → Sports in Georgia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Haiti national cricket team → Culture of Haiti#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kyrgyzstan national cricket team → Kyrgyzstan#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Laos national cricket team → Laos#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Lebanon national cricket team → Sport in Lebanon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Liberia national cricket team → Liberia#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Libya national cricket team → Sport in Libya (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Liechtenstein national cricket team → Liechtenstein#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Madagascar national cricket team → Madagascar#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mauritania national cricket team → Sport in Mauritania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Micronesia national cricket team → Micronesia#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Moldova national cricket team → Sport in Moldova (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Monaco national cricket team → Monaco#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nicaragua national cricket team → Nicaragua#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Niger national cricket team → Culture of Niger#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
North Korea national cricket team → Sport in North Korea (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
North Macedonia national cricket team → North Macedonia#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Palau national cricket team → Palau#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Palestine national cricket team → Sport in Palestine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Paraguay national cricket team → Sport in Paraguay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
San Marino national cricket team → San Marino (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slovak National Cricket Team → Sport in Slovakia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slovakia national cricket team → Sport in Slovakia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Somalia national cricket team → Sports in Somalia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
South Sudan national cricket team → Sport in South Sudan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sudan national cricket team → Sudan#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Syria national cricket team → Culture of Syria#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Tahiti national cricket team → Tahiti#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Tunisia national cricket team → Sport in Tunisia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Turkmenistan national cricket team → Outline of Turkmenistan#Sports in Turkmenistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Yemen national cricket team → Culture of Yemen#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

We have no mention of cricket in relation to any of these countries that I've found, let alone national cricket teams, except as follows:

Asian Cricket Council#Members of ACC lists (without a source) Chinese Taipei as being a non-member but doesn't mention the national cricket team. China national cricket team notes in the lead that Hong Kong and Taiwan "both field separate teams in international cricket." There are no other articles that have content about cricket under either name as far as I've found.
Asian Cricket Council#Future Members has an unsourced table listing Kazakhstan, Loas, Lebanon, and Syria but doesn't mention then national cricket team at all.
Footnote b at ICC Americas states there is "conflicting information about whether Chile and Paraguay were, in fact, members of the council." but that's the only mention of Paraguay on the page.

Additionally:

Micronesia is about the geographical region, the country's article is at Federated States of Micronesia, the sport section of that article has content only about baseball, association football and athletics.
Sports in Georgia is a disambiguation page between the articles about sports in the country and US state, neither has any content about cricket.
Tahiti (the section is titled Sport not Sports) is about the island not the country (French Polynesia) but we don't have any content about cricket in the latter either.

Accordingly I recommended deletion as misleading and/or per WP:REDLINK. See also similar RfDs at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 25#Algeria national cricket team and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#Belarus national cricket team. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)}[reply]

Note Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lithuania national cricket team (January 2021) also discussed North Macedonia national cricket team and Slovakia national cricket team and concluded to "redirect to the corresponding 'Sport in X' page. Pinging the participants: @AssociateAffiliate, Nigej, Blue Square Thing, Spiderone, and Bs1jac:. A previous article about the Nicaraguan team was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belarus national cricket team in 2014. Pinging the logged-in participants: @Tone, LibStar, and Stalwart111:. I will notify [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject cricket about this and the other cricket-related RfDs on this page. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to delete these – the rationale is good and thanks for doing the legwork searching for them Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:27, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sunny (upcoming TV series)

Sunny (upcoming TV series) → Sunny (TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27 § Sunny (upcoming TV series) – keep

No longer "upcoming", released over a year ago. In addition, the target is now cancelled ... which is almost the opposite of "upcoming" for released media. Steel1943 (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep To clarify the nomination (which confused me) the target article is about a TV series that was cancelled after a single season. Page views indicate the people are still looking for something at this title, it seems probable that most those people are looking for information about a second series (not knowing there will not be one) and/or are following outdated links. The first group of people will definitely be helped by the existence of this redirect, and the second group will not be harmed. Thryduulf (talk) 19:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...~~3–4~~ 4–6 page views in the last ~~month~~ 20 days represents "people [who] are still looking for something at this title"? Steel1943 (talk) 20:10, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know where you are getting that figure from, but the 30 days prior to this nomination saw 10 hits and 1 January to 28 September saw 123 hits - and the pattern of those views indicates a continuing trend not declining views. Both of those unquestionably indicate that people are still looking for something at this title Thryduulf (talk) 21:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I meant 4–6 in the last 20 days: [12] Steel1943 (talk) 22:28, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anybody can cherry pick arbitrarily small periods of time to make a point, but 20 days is simply not a long enough period over which to make any reliable determination about what the long-term usage of a redirect like this is - which is why I looked at the stats for the whole year. Over that meaningful period of time stats show that the usage of this redirect has not tapered off and is not displaying signs of tapering off, rather remaining constant. That's not evidence that this is no longer used. Thryduulf (talk) 22:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Anybody can cherry pick arbitrarily small periods of time..." For the record, actually, all I did was use the default timeframe the page view tool utilizes and didn't care to change it. Steel1943 (talk) 18:39, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should change the default? If you look at page views since it was redirected to this TV series, it's 800 a month, which is more than about three-quarters of all articles. However, use dropped off sharply about a year ago.

Perhaps we should restore the original target, which was the Wikipedia:Disambiguation page Sunny#Film and television. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:41, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The "stats" link in the RfD header uses the 30 days prior to nomination, and that's a reasonable default for most cases, but for some, such as most "upcoming" and similar redirects, long-term trends are important and you cannot tell that without looking over a period of multiple months. Thryduulf (talk) 12:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Meets the intent of WP:UFILM criteria. There simply isn't an upcoming series. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The intent of UFILM is that redirects are not deleted before their usefulness has concluded. The stats show the usefulness of this redirect has not concluded. Thryduulf (talk) 22:49, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 10, 2025

September 10, 2025 → Assassination of Charlie Kirk (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I think it's incredibly unlikely that someone will type in this date with the expectation that this will be the resulting target. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This is not the only event that has happened on this date. A similar redirect, September 10, 2025 shooting was deleted for the same reason. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 06:08, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 08:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. One of many events that occurred on this date. CNC (talk) 11:00, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and there are no reliable sources referring to the assassination incident as "September 10" and especially not as "September 10, 2025". It already has a proper name, "the assassination of Charles Kirk". This is in no way similar to something like September 11 or October 7 which don't have well-established names so utilize the date as part of their "official-unofficial" title. McRandy1958 (talk) 16:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an implausible search term. This attack is not referenced by its date as others referenced above.Frank Anchor 21:10, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's just a date, not a useful search term. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2025 September 10 per past consensus regarding single date redirects. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:11, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thought's on Tavix's suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:58, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment is it reasonable to have that many redirects as the type that Tavix is suggesting would imply? 365*#years seems like it may not be the greatest solution for this. Tduk (talk) 19:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think it'd be reasonable. There is no limit to the number of redirects that can exist. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:31, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per the request for thoughts about the retargeting idea, I don't feel strongly but I have no objection, so I guess I can give that a mild support, so long as it takes readers to that list of events that happened on that date. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:04, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget to Portal:Current events/2025 September 10 since I made a similar argument recently. Quite frankly, we may want to consider moving the respective daily Portal:Current events subpages to the article space. Steel1943 (talk) 22:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2025 September 10 per precedent. It's in portal-space, but it's still reader-facing content (and I agree should really be in article-space). J 947 ‡ ^edits 23:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New South Wales national cricket team

New South Wales national cricket team → New South Wales cricket team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Queensland national cricket team → Queensland cricket team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
South Australia national cricket team → South Australia cricket team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Victoria national cricket team → Victoria cricket team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

In the present day these are exclusively and unambiguously domestic not national teams. Prior to Australian federation in 1901 they particupated in Intercolonial cricket in Australia but do not seem to have been regarded as national teams, with teams representing Australia from the dawn of international cricket on the continent in the 1870s. Certainly I can't find any evidence of these teams being called national cricket teams. Thryduulf (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't recall any mention of them as "national" teams from their tours of NZ in the 1870s and so on – inter-colonial is as far as it went I think. These should almost certainly be deletes Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:56, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see no evidence any of them competed as "national teams". Joseph2302 (talk) 10:14, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete They were Australian colonies in the 19th century, then they were Australian states from 1901. They were never regarded as nations, either by their residents or by outsiders, and they never had the legal status of nations. A completely unnecessary redirect. Sammyrice (talk) 00:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hampshire national cricket team

Hampshire national cricket team → Hampshire County Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kent national cricket team → Kent County Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Worcestershire national cricket team → Worcestershire County Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Yorkshire national cricket team → Yorkshire County Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These are English domestic cricket clubs not national teams, never have been national teams and are not referred to as such. Thryduulf (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I cannot see any reason for these. Bs1jac (talk) 18:13, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Counties aren't nations. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:51, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Really clear deletes Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete these are not countries or independent sporting nations, and have never had a national team. Joseph2302 (talk)• — Preceding undated comment added 08:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as much as one of those counties may like to think of itself as a separate country ;), they are not nations and hence not national cricket teams. Spike 'em (talk) 12:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lithuania national cricket team

Lithuania national cricket team → Sport in Lithuania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no mention of cricket at the present target, we do have related content, but not enough to (imo) support a redirect: Associate international cricket in 2021#2021 Baltic Cup, Associate international cricket in 2022#2022 Baltic Cup and Associate international cricket in 2025#2025 Baltic Cup each have two tables relating to a tournament featuring Luthuania but redirecting to a single one is not helpful. ICC Europe#Future Members has an unsourced entry but that doesn't mention the national team. Note that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lithuania national cricket team (January 2021) closed with a consensus to redirect to the corresponding 'Sport in X' page. Pinging the participants of that discussion @AssociateAffiliate, Nigej, Blue Square Thing, Spiderone, and Bs1jac:. Thryduulf (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I would consider deleting. They are not members of the ICC and there is almost no information. Similar for Latvia. Doesn't need a link simply because the team is mentioned in a minor event (that doesn't even have its own article) Bs1jac (talk) 18:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm more convinced by Bs1jac's argument than I am by my own at the AfD – I didn't see that then and might have changed my opinion if I had. I'm happy to delete unless someone comes up with anything that shows that they're members of the ICC or similar Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:53, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Timor-Leste national cricket team

Timor-Leste national cricket team → Sport in Timor-Leste (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no relevant content at the target page but International Cricket Council mentions the Timor-Leste Cricket Federation in the lead as being the latest (as of 2025) associate member, and it gets an a mention in the third table in the Members section (where it is called the Timor-Leste Cricket Board), and similarly there is an entry at List of International Cricket Council members#Associate members but that's it. Asian Cricket Council#Members of ICC in Asia but not part of Asian Cricket Council lists them as non-member, and they are shown as a member at ICC East Asia-Pacific#Members, both unsourced. None of these mention the national cricket team. Thryduulf (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget I would change the redirect to List of International Cricket Council members#Associate members. East Timor / Timor-Leste became members of the ICC in July 2025. I think their ACC membership is pending. Bs1jac (talk) 18:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retargetting as above seems sensible given ICC membership Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

זגרב

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

No affinity between Hebrew and Zagreb. Delete. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:48, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to History of the Jews in Croatia. There was a sizeable Jewish population in Zagreb. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 22:52, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RLOTE. I think retargeting to History of the Jews in Croatia is too much of a stretch, more likely to confuse than to help a reader reach the article they're looking for. (It's worth noting the traditional languages of most European Jewish communities are Yiddish and Ladino; Hebrew was mainly limited to liturgical use until the 20th century.) —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:03, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:43, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete זגרב is not mentioned or discussed at either Zagreb or History of the Jews in Croatia, unlike, say, Akkordeon is at its target. Paradoctor (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget → Names of European cities in different languages (U–Z)#Z per recommendation at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 16#Sagelebu. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:01, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 17:33, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ivory Coast women's national cricket team

Ivory Coast women's national cricket team → List of International Cricket Council members (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no mention of a women's team at the target, Africa Cricket Association#ACA members or at International Cricket Council#Members (where the country's entry is under Cote D'Ivoire). The only other places on en.wp cricket in this country is mentioned that I've found is in articles about other national teams they have competed against. Thryduulf (talk) 17:23, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Give that a search throws up the redirect and a Facebook post, delete seems reasonable here Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:24, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aza-arene

Aza-arene → Aromaticity#Heterocyclics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not described in any article. If kept, it should at least target Aromatic compound#Heteroarenes (the target of HeteroareneHeteroarene as well). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 12:20, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:. "Aza-arene" refers to nitrogen-containing aromatic heterocycles. A Google search of the term gives many results, so I think the term is common enough to warrant keeping a redirect rather than it being deleted. The current target does include a list of such compounds ("pyridine, pyrazine, imidazole, pyrazole, oxazole, thiazole"), so it is currently a plausible redirect. 1234qwer1234qwer4's suggested target, Aromatic compound#Heteroarenes, is reasonable as well (though heteroarene redirects to simple aromatic ring, which doesn't seem appropriate to me because not all heteroarenes are simple). We have two articles, aromaticity and aromatic compound, that overlap and cover the same topic so I'm not sure which is is a better target for aza-arene. Whichever target is chosen, heteroarene should probably be retargeted there as well. Marbletan (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, not sure what convinced me that "heteroarene" had the same target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:03, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Channel DDD

Channel DDD → Kirby: Right Back at Ya! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; unsure if the passing mentions at List of Kirby: Right Back at Ya! episodes are enough to point it there. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:44, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uzbekistan women's national cricket team

Uzbekistan women's national cricket team → Cricket Federation of Uzbekistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Uzbekistan national under-19 cricket team → Cricket Federation of Uzbekistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Uzbekistan women's national under-19 cricket team → Cricket Federation of Uzbekistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no content about these teams at the target, or anywhere else on Wikipedia that I can find. Thryduulf (talk) 17:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bugolobi

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Incorrect venue

England national football team

~~England national football team~~ ~~→ England men's national football team (talk · links · history · stats)~~ [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These articles have recently been moved (the first two as a result of RM) to the more specific title. The resulting redirects from the former titles are not appropriate, as this is unnecessary disambiguation. Make dabpage in the same style as Sweden national football team, United States national soccer team, etc. 162 etc. (talk) 16:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Iceland national football team → Iceland men's national football team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]~~
New Zealand national football team → New Zealand men's national football team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Oppose the RM proposal for England national team was to keep the redirect rather than turn into a DAB. The men's team is still the clear Primary Topic. Spike 'em (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I urge you to read the closing statement of that RM again - the closer specifically stated in regards to the primary redirect that "the men's team no longer seems to be continuously primary, and given the neutrality complaints, it seems inappropriate to keep this arrangement" and that "editors should choose disambiguation page or broad topic article to replace it." @Beland: 162 etc. (talk) 22:18, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have made my comment and I stand by it. Men's article gets many times more page views over a 4-year cycle than the women's. Spike 'em (talk) 06:01, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Clear primary redirects. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Giant Snowman 18:40, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as above and due to ongoing Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2025 September#England men's national football team. Giant Snowman 18:41, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The England article has now been returned to the original title England national football team as a result of Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2025 September, so that aspect is now moot. I mistakenly procedural-closed the whole RfD, but 162 etc. pointed out to me that I had overlooked the Iceland and New Zealand redirects. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:54, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also note that the above oppose !votes appear aimed at the England article and I invite @Spike 'em:, @Necrothesp:, and @GiantSnowman: to clarify if they have any thoughts on the Iceland and New Zealand redirects. 162 etc. (talk) 23:02, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My only thoughts are that the Iceland article was moved quoting the England move as recent precedence: that should be revisited. Spike 'em (talk) 06:44, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also primary redirects to the men's teams. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:41, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
New Zealand is probably borderline - England and Iceland are clear PRIMARY for men's. Giant Snowman 17:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The Iceland move has been reverted and accordingly struck from this discussion.--estar8806 (talk) ★ 12:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It is worth noting that in most other sports (all?) the word "men's" is included. I suppose England might one day enter the 21st century? (See for example Great Britain men's national ice hockey team) Rwood128 (talk) 10:27, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not relevant to this RFD. The move has been reverted due to no actual consensus, and England and Iceland are thus no longer part of this RFD discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

India military national cricket team

India military national cricket team → Services cricket team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'm not sure whether this is simply incorrect or whether it's conflating two searpate teams. The prose of the target article is all about a cricket team that plays domestic cricket in India (and so not a national cricket team) founded in the 1940s but the infobox indicates they played international cricket in the 1920s? I can't find any indication of a cricket team ever called "India Military". Thryduulf (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article itself needs some cleanup, but it does appear that Services are a cricket club that represent the Indian armed forces.^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Casablanca Rock (talk • contribs) 16:33, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is not in doubt, but they don't represent the Indian military in international competitions, so it isn't a national cricket team. Thryduulf (talk) 22:50, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Self-trout for my not signing my comment. Does "national cricket team" imply international competition? If it is exclusively used for that I am ok with delete as well as they do not play internationally. In my mind this worked okay because they represent the military of India and India is a nation so they must be the "India military national cricket team". If I am the only person who interprets it that way though, it's probably not helpful to the reader. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 12:47, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clear delete – the title is deliberately misleading. Nothing wrong with Services, they've play domestically, but this is not an international team Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:17, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – it doesn't make grammatical or logical sense, so it's completely unnecessary. Sammyrice (talk) 00:19, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Joshi, Harit M (10 October 2016). "Without BCCI funds or attention, Ranji outsiders Services fight on many fronts". Hindustan Times.

InfoTrac OneFile

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Cricket at the Southeast Asian Games

Cricket at the Southeast Asian Games → SEA Games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cricket at the SEA Games → SEA Games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:REDLINK and WP:R#DELETE point 10. SEA Games#Sports has a single cell in the table which informs only that cricket was a sport played in the 2017 and 2023 editions, SEA Games sports#Sports has a larger table where we find there were three events in 2017, 8 in 2023 and 4 in 2025 but no more information than that. Compare with the amount of information available at e.g. Basketball at the SEA Games article - even though that is not an example of Wikipedia's best work it's far more useful to readers. Thryduulf (talk) 14:27, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with a delete here. I'm surprised we don't have an article on it to be honest, but if we do the person who creates it can get the credit for creating it Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:19, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to encourage possible article creation, and because there isn't a clear, sensible target. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to encourage article creation. If the nominator hadn't said so, I'd've more strongly suggested the creation of a set index- or disambiguation-like page tagged with {{broad concept article}}, as "Cricket in 20YY SEA Games" seem to exist. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:23, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Congratulations! → Congratulations! (opera) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Malplaced redirect. Retarget to dabpage Congratulations or move? ArthananWarcraft (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to dab. I doubt the opera is the primary topic. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Despite my reluctance to ask the closer to read yet another SMALLDETAILS discussion, I note that "Congratulations!" is a common interjection. Its appearance on greeting cards and during every year's commencement season makes it a plausible search target. Comparisons to "Airplane!" etc. may not be straightforward. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move "Congratulations! (opera)" to "Congratulations!" per WP:SMALLDETAILS; it seems to be the only item with the exclamation point at the end. Anyone adding the "!" can get pointed back to the dab page with a hatnote if needed. I understand the hesitation here, but we do have a similar situation in place at Airplane! already. Can anyone find any others? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:39, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Support move. Emergency!, Milkshake!, Freak Out!, Blame!, Climax!... Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notified talk of related dab. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 10:25, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 2001

In 2001 → 2001 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
In 2020 → 2020 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete, unlikely search terms which don't seem to serve any purpose. Such redirects for other years (such as In 2002, In 2003, etc.) don't exist. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 13:49, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete may make searching harder. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:38, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luzes (song)

Luzes (song) → Juice Wrld (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Luzes → Juice Wrld (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unable to find sourcing that this song exists. मल्ल (talk) 13:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. A search through enwiki found no song that I would plausibly just call "Luzes". Taking the base page name and retargeting (e.g. to luz (disambiguation)) or soft retargeting to Wiktionary is only dubiously helpful at best. DuckDuckGo for "Luzes" "Juice Wrld" yielded me nothing. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The song did exist, but it was taken down.[13] ItsMario97 (talk) 01:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lakatos (disambiguation)

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

Delete. Target is not a disambiguation page. GilaMonster536 (talk) 13:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While not technically a disambiguation page, it performs a "disambiguation-like function" which WP:G14 notes would make it not a category to be speedy deleted in that way. I think it ultimately helps the reader who might know that Wikipedia pages that perform disambiguation-like functions end in (disambiguation) if they search this to go to Lakatos instead of ending up at a search page. I don't think there is much ambiguity here. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:09, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because the redirect doesn't not qualify for WP:G14 since the target is "disambiguation-like". Steel1943 (talk) 19:06, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I remember there's a software issue in one of our commonly used disambiguation tools where this sort of a redirect needs to exist, otherwise you can't mark direct links to the surname list as unambiguous using these tools. --Joy (talk) 07:22, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
uh... weak move to lakatos and vice-versa? i found like two results that weren't just surnames (lakato and lakatos award), so they might warrant moving to a more disambiguation-shaped title consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's no singular/plural between Lakato and Lakatos, the former is a (single) place in Madagascar. Does anyone actually refer to the award as just "Lakatos"? --Joy (talk) 14:04, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
lakato would've most likely just been a hatnote or see also lol. as for the award... eh. i can't really say for sure, but it's in the name, so maybe? mouse (disambiguation), for example, has a good handful of things that aren't just known as "mouse" (like michael rat or whatever his name was), and dream diary (second d capital, very important distinction) has yume nikki (which isn't literally known as "dream diary" like its reboot, even though that's what its name translates to), so i think that's fine consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:05, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive citations

Excessive citations → Wikipedia:Citing sources#Bundling citations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. Apparently created in the main namespace by mistake, instead of Wikipedia: namespace where there is already a page (redirect) serving the same purpose: Wikipedia:Excessive citations. --Wotheina (talk) 06:56, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I’ve fixed the nomination and notified the target of this rfd. Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:15, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. I can't see any evidence that this was created by mistake, so it can't be speedily deleted under G6. This isn't something that needs a cross-namespace redirect, and I've not been able to find a suitable target in the main namespace but this last point surprises me so please regard this as a retarget recommendation if someone else is able to find a relevant encyclopaedic topic. Thryduulf (talk) 11:15, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is a mistake because the creator used it in their edit summary for a situation of Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Fine if it is retargetable though. I invited opinions at Talk:Citation. --Wotheina (talk) 00:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:39, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 13:11, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. An unnecessary WP:CNR. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:14, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...This phrase makes me think of a potentially misheard lyric in "Good Vibrations". Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Immigration Problem

Immigration Problem → Immigration to Bhutan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Huh? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:29, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this was the original page title for 25 minutes. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:58, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Nowhere near specific to Bhutan; there IS an argument for retargeting to Immigration and crime but I'm iffy on it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Immigration Problem" is too general to identify a useful target. We shouldn't retarget to Immigration and crime; there are all sorts of problems related to immigration that have nothing to do with crime. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:22, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget, weakly to Opposition to immigration. That there is an "immigration problem" is a claim currently being made by various groups in the UK currently, and there have been many similar claims by multiple different groups in many different times and places previously so this is definitely a plausible search term that should lead somewhere. Opposition to immigration is the best target I've found I think, but Refugee crisis and immigration and crime are also not unrelated and there may be others I haven't found too. Thryduulf (talk) 11:21, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment interesting how a title in use for 25 minutes all the way back in 2006 can be brought up nearly almost 19 years later Oreocooke (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: unsuitably vague. The Immigration and crime retarget is plausible, but many things that might constitute an "immigration problem" have nothing to do with criminality or even value judgements. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:41, 24 September 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! 08:38, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no great target. Weak retarget to Opposition to immigration as least worst option if this must be kept --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 13:24, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Immigration Problem" implies a proper noun, and Immigration problem is red. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, vague term with no suitable target at the moment. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 07:40, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Retarget~~ per Thryduulf. Best target that generally overarches possible targets. Respublik (talk) 06:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Shhhnotsoloud, but properly capitalized redlink can be created as a redirect per Thryduulf. Respublik (talk) 06:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hexahectaenneacontakaiheptagon

Hexahectaenneacontakaiheptagon → wiktionary:Special:Search/hexahectaenneacontakaiheptagon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

2023 June 18 § Hexahectaenneacontakaiheptagon – delete

Unmentioned anywhere onwiki and previously deleted. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this is not a G4 candidate as when this was previously discussed the target was Colorado. Thryduulf (talk) 11:23, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
comment what? Oreocooke (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what it is you find confusing, so sorry if this sounds condescending, it's not intended to be. Pages that are "substantially identical" recreations of pages that were previous deleted by consensus can be speedily deleted under speedy deletion criterion G4. For redirects that generally means both the title and target need to be very nearly exact matches, but in this case the previous target was completely different. This means that, despite a redirect at this title previously being deleted, this one is not eligible for speedy deletion.

If you mean "why did this title redirect to Colorado?", according to the linked previous discussion there are multiple mentions of the term which "all lead back to a 2018 item from bigthink.com which asserts that the state has 697 sides." Thryduulf (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Bizarre as it is, there are RSs that discuss this shape and they almost exclusively do so in describing Colorado (eg The Denver Post). Redirects are cheap, and this is a plausible—if unusual—search term. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:13, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Wiktionary redirects are harmful and (mostly) useless. There are currently no instances of this word on WP, but it's harder to see that with this redirect in place, and that may change in the future. Such a search also features a link to, and the primary definition of, the entry in question prominently at the top, so is more useful. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget to Geography of Colorado per the addition made below. That's reasonable, although I think this could be fine from a regular search as well. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meh I see Colorado#Geography and Geography of Colorado both mention the 697 sides thing. If someone can use the RSes claimed above to squeeze a mention of this term into one of those articles, IMO redirecting to that would be best. Or someone could add mention of this into List of polygons or Polygon#Naming and redirect there. Anomie ⚔ 17:22, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added an RS to verify that the shape is used to refer to the shape of Colorado to Geography of Colorado, which I think is a superior redirect target for the page in question. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:32, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chimera (pl. chimaera)

Chimera (pl. chimaera) → Chimera (genetics) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete this WP:UNNATURAL redirect. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:19, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 13:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 17:21, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LGBTQ issues

LGBTQ issues → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Lesbian issue → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Lesbian issues → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gay issue → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gay issues → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bisexual issue → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bisexual issues → LGBTQ people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These redirects were all mass created for the recently created LGBTQ issue, the content of which was subsequently merged into LGBTQ people post AfD/DRV/Merge talk page discussion.
These redirects may wrongly imply that LGBTQ people are "an issue" with the redirects pointing to LGBTQ people, so they should be deleted as unlikely search terms. I have moved the LGBTQ issue to Issues affecting LGBTQ people which is a more appropriate title for the redirect that needs to remain due to its history needing to continue existing for attribution purposes of the merged content. Raladic (talk) 07:05, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep LGBTQ issue. The nominator's undiscussed move of the LGBTQ issue redirect (without leaving a redirect) has been undone. This is an exceptionally plausible search term. Keep the rest as well. Also plausible. The stated concern the redirect may wrongly imply that LGBTQ people are "an issue" is not not a reason to delete. The likelihood that someone will type in LGBTQ issue thinking "fixing the problem of all these LGBTQ people existing in the society" is pretty much zero, and even if someone does that, LGBTQ people is still a relevant topic for that user. The "X issue" title of the former (now merged) LGBTQ issue article was modelled after Social issue. There are other "X issue" redirects, such as Gender issue.—Alalch E. — Preceding undated comment added 10:03, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mhh, this framing device is covered at fairly great lengths in history in school, at least in Europe.

Framing like this has long historic problematic use. Famously there was the "Jewish question", "The Negro problem", "The woman question", The Indian removal (also referred to as the "Indian problem"), "Abortion issue".

The framing device of "GroupXTopicX Issue/Problem/Question" is historically as old as day, and we have some articles as I just listed that discuss these historic events in context. And while sometimes some historically negative terms have been reclaimed by groups (e.g. queer having been reclaimed by many people in the LGBTQ community from its prior use as a pejorative slur directed at them), many have not, and this framing device is not one that I've seen reclaimed in any contexts I'm aware of.

So, your redirects now present LGBTQ, gay, lesbian, bisexual people as being a similar such issue linguistically. This is very problematic as such framing has historically been typically used in extremely negatively way, in many cases with the intent and acts of murdering/eradicating groups of people.

Yes, we have WP:RNEUTRAL, but we also have WP:offensive material and do not allow WP:GRATUITOUS usage in all cases, this terminology is one such cases.

If there was an article that would discuss such historic events where people have used the phrase as a propaganda mechanism and we document those atrocities, that's a different thing, but redirecting a phrase that has historically been used as a linguistic device in connection with considering the word before "issue/problem/question" to make group "the problem" does have an extremely offensive connotation.

This is different to if the redirects you had created were called "LGBTQ people's issues", "Gay men's issues", "Bisexual people's issues", "Lesbian women's issues", like say Women's issues - this makes it clear that there are issues affecting a group - hence my move of the LGBTQ issue to Issues affecting LGBTQ people as that meant we have a redirect from a plausible neutral term.

So, I must assume you accidentally left the English possessive apostrophe s to title them to be issues affecting this population. So, we can either move all of these to "Issues affecting GroupX" like I did for the one that we can't delete because attribution history, or we delete them, but redirecting them as they currently are, is extremely problematic without the target discussing them (like say if a historian were to liken some of the current events to historic events and points out some dictators or the like's use of the phrase in connection to it). Raladic (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
while i'll disagree with the nom's rationale that it implies they're the issue, delete all except the first one as vague anyway. there are a few issues involving them, sure, but maybe a few too many, since it goes beyond what issues involving lgbtq people currently has, so people looking for more specific topics under those vague titles will want more specific stuff. weak retarget the first one to match with lgbtq issues, but if taken to rfd again, i'd support deletion outright consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of all of these, I think LGBTQ issues is the most likely to be a search term. As a redirect, the question isn't whether it is neutral, as non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. I think the most likely interpretation would be something like "topics being debated or discussed related to LGBTQ people", so the appropriate target is our broad concept article covering all topics related to LGBTQ people. If the others are kept, there is no reason to redirect to LGBTQ people rather than the more specific subject article (e.g., Lesbian issue to Lesbian).--Trystan (talk) 13:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oh right yeah there's also different definitions of "issue" that could apply here, i forgot about that consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 13:28, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Lesbian issue & Lesbian issues → Lesbian; Retarget Bisexual issue & Bisexual issues → Bisexuality; Keep LGBTQ issues, Gay issue, & Gay issues. These are all plausible enough and while I agree they do not make good article or dab page titles, the corresponding articles broadly cover 'issues' facing each group. Since Gay people is not an article but is a redirect to List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, keep 'gay' with 'LGBTQ'. Gay men and Lesbian are each too narrow. Better to redirect this to the broader topic that is inclusive of all gay identities as an {{R from subtopic}}. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:37, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pustule

Pustule → Skin condition#Pustule (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Pustules are not unique to human skin. They can also develop in plants, particularly in rust diseases. [14][15] Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 03:07, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The skin condition appears to be the primary topic. If there’s content on plant pustules the hatnote can be updated to include it. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:55, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They're not really different phenomena. It's the same thing (necrotic cells). It's not something that only happens to human skin. I usually only see hatnotes if you have another article to lead to. I think we might be better served by deleting the redirect to encourage article creation. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn’t make sense to delete a redirect to the relevant content that we do have. I was merely suggesting that *if* we had content on plant pustules, the hatnote could be updated. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 12:57, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RETURNTORED is something that happens. It's the origin story of ketchup chips, actually. I created that as a redirect in 2019, there was an RfD, and then I created the article after it was deleted. It's possible this experience gave me unrealistic expectations for how common this is? I review redirects to sections for NPP all the time. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:42, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The current redirect set up is appropriate. We have content, however brief, on the primary meaning of 'pustule' and we redirect readers there. If we delete it we will no longer take readers directly there. Maintaining the primary redirect is useful; otherwise, Pustule (hieroglyph) should be at the base name if that is the only article using that name. The current situation is not a barrier to creating content about plant pustules. If such pages exist, Pustule can be converted to a dab or the discussion can be revisited here or at RM or another appropriate venue. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:13, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

September 28

Athletics at the 2028 Summer Olympics

Athletics at the 2028 Summer Olympics → 2028 Summer Olympics#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not helpful to readers. Hardly mentioned at target, links to it are from other pages about the 2028 Olympics. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 20:12, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that currently all other sports in the list at 2028 Summer Olympics#Sports seem to be linking back to that section. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 15:16, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All should be deleted and I will nominate if this one is deleted Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:25, 26 September 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 23:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Qby (talk) 09:02, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The history shows a minimal amount of content and repeated back and forth reverts to the redirect. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:39, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neelam Nagaratnamma Reddy

Neelam Nagaratnamma Reddy → Neelam Sanjiva Reddy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete, as per Telegu naming convention this long version of the name is unlikely a possible search term. More likely search terms Neelam Nagaratnamma and Nagaratnamma Reddy are already redirected to the target article. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 09:45, 21 September 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 23:43, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

International Movement of the Apostolate of Children

International Movement of the Apostolate of Children → Pontifical Council for the Laity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete: enwiki has nothing to say about this subject. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bela Kun,

Bela Kun, → Béla Kun (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Name ending with an erroneous comma. — Hydrogenation (talk) 17:39, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: a page exists with the same title, except without the comma. BodhiHarp 21:01, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 22:15, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, ArthananWarcraft (talk) 04:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom,. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 08:57, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RDAB, although it's existed since 2011 it's always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:41, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Voiceless post-palatal nasal" and related redirects

Voiceless post-palatal nasal → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ɲ̥˗ → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ɲ̊˗ → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ɲ̥̠ → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ɲ̠̥ → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ɲ̠̊ → Voiceless palatal nasal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I propose we delete this redirect and related ones including Ɲ̠̊, Ɲ̠̥, Ɲ̥̠, Ɲ̊˗, and Ɲ̥˗. See this. BodhiHarp 17:30, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I nominated and merged Ɲ̠̊, Ɲ̠̥, Ɲ̥̠, Ɲ̊˗, and Ɲ̥˗ into this nomination. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 21:51, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:DONOT

Wikipedia:DONOT → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect is anything but unambiguous. There are so many "Do not" Wikipedia policies, and this redirect only exists because it was once redirected to WP:NOT and the double redirect fixer "fixed" it. This redirect shouldn't be deleted, but seriously should either be retargeted or become a dab page. SeaHaircut SoilReplace 14:17, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought would be Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point, but there are plenty of other pages listed at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Do not that this could point to. There's also WP:DONTWP:DONT and WP:DON'TWP:DON'T, both of which currently redirect to WP:Don't panic. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then why not turn DONOT into a dab page? SeaHaircut SoilReplace 22:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely DONOT keep, but as for viable targets? Maybe retarget to Wikipedia:Dos and don'ts if anywhere, but I don't know if any of the "Don't ..." targets would make much sense over any of the others. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe this page should be a disambiguation, or at the target page, we could say BodhiHarp 17:36, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Friedrich Karsch

Friedrich Karsch → Ferdinand Karsch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect, possibly created by mistake, just creates confusion and is not helpful. Gjs238 (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ferdinand Karsch had three first names. Ferdinand. Anton. Franz. Friedrich was not one of them. But I thought so, and linked it, and it became a blue link. So now in my head he's Friedrich Karsch. I'm not the only one, there were about a dozen other pages doing this. I really think we should delete this redirect so people can see they're wrong. googling "Friedrich Karsch" gives Ferdinand Karsch. Let's give the old guy his name back. Sarefo (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ah, I see you did the work for me, thank you :D I just discovered Twinkle… Sarefo (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the nominator's reason. BodhiHarp 21:02, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is an odd case. This is an incorrect name for this person; however, the article was at that location for 9 months and it seems Friedrich Karsch gets consistent page views, so it is probably most in the spirit of WP:RF to keep. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 21:57, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: redirect was nominated twice. The two nominations statements have been consolidated above and the !votes have been merged in chronological order. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 22:00, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Twonicorn

Twonicorn → Lisa the Drama Queen (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article 88.97.192.42 (talk) 13:12, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dash Calhoun

Dash Calhoun → Marge vs. the Monorail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Snrub → Marge vs. the Monorail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Neither of these are mentioned in the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:59, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goodtime Slim, Uncle Doobie and the Great Frisco Freakout

Goodtime Slim, Uncle Doobie and the Great Frisco Freakout → Grampa vs. Sexual Inadequacy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:55, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Škola

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

Wiktionary states this means school in Czech, Latgalian, Slovak, and Serbo-Croation. I don't think there is any particular inherent affinity here for WP:RFOR. Zzz plant (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and WP:FORRED. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 13:58, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FORRED. Steel1943 (talk) 02:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We are china right?

We are china right? → G.I. (Annoyed Grunt) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:38, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American Boneheads: A Day in the Life of Springfield Elementary

American Boneheads: A Day in the Life of Springfield Elementary → 'Scuse Me While I Miss the Sky (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A Day in the Life of Springfield Elementary → 'Scuse Me While I Miss the Sky (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When Dinosaurs Get Drunk

When Dinosaurs Get Drunk → I Am Furious (Yellow) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Rageahol → I Am Furious (Yellow) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Neither of these are mentioned in the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:26, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crayola oblongata

Crayola oblongata → HOMR (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sick, Twisted, F**ked-Up Animation Festival → HOMR (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Neither of these are mentioned in the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:20, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the former page was created by a sock and I've tagged it with G5 accordingly. Aydo h8^{[what have I done now?]} 12:23, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly the block did not show in the blocklog, but did show on Special:CentralAuth/Byxakissaren as 2013, but on the manage blocks admin page it says "04:27, 4 June 2007" and the other sock "12:52, 10 May 2007". However as the redirect creation pre-dates both of these G5 still does not apply. Regards KylieTastic (talk) 13:57, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Miller Ratio

Dennis Miller Ratio → They Saved Lisa's Brain (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article 88.97.192.42 (talk) 12:10, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gramola (kneader)

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

2024 Chinese Women's Super League

2024 Chinese Women's Super League2024 Chinese Women's Super League → Chinese Women's Super League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target page. Qby (talk) 09:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sagelebu

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

No affinity between Chinese romanization and Zagreb. Delete. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Names of European cities in different languages (U–Z)#Z where mentioned. J 947 ‡ ^edits 01:55, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:43, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget per J947. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:59, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. Hard for me to see much value in the proposed retarget. I'm not sure if the proposed target should exist at all, as it's not much more than a long list of dictionary entries. I see it was taken to AfD several years ago in a trainwreck nomination resulting in no consensus. Retargeting seems harmless to me, but I think deletion would be more in the spirit of WP:NOTDICT and WP:RLOTE. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:56, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:58, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Qasim ibn Abd al-Karim

Muhammad Qasim ibn Abd al-Karim → Mohammad Qasim (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was an article that was BLARed after its notability was contested. However, having a redirect from a highly specific name to a DAB page for similar names does not make sense. This should have gone to AfD. Either restore the article or delete the page. — Anonymous 13:29, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Mahdi claimants#People claimed to be the Mahdi by their followers or supporters and remove the bluelink to this redirect in that section, unless there is inclusion criteria for that list that would no longer be met if he is not bluelinked. If that does not work, restore and go to AfD. I do not mind this redirect being deleted necessarily, but it feels somewhat out of process to me because the BLAR wasn't to a page that makes sense. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:13, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i can't believe i'm saying this, but... restore!? it seemed to have some content worth keeping, even if it requires a fair bit of cleanup. while i'll support taking it to afd right away, i won't oppose draftifying it instead. regardless of what's done, don't just keep or restore without changes or action. also, yes, i've got some mild opposition towards deletion consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 00:17, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:50, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

for the record, i'm also fine with retargeting and adding some of the sources from the history to that section consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 22:57, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commutative superalgeba

Commutative superalgeba → Supercommutative algebra (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible typo given how specific the title is. Algeba does not exist either. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 05:28, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Line 12 (MRT)

Line 12 (MRT) → Downtown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Singapore does not refer to its MRT lines by numbers.

Not only that, we don't even have a 12th MRT line. Seloloving (talk) 03:18, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per similar previous multi-nomination at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Line 4 (Singapore MRT). Fork99 (talk) 05:44, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, since "MRT" is ambiguous, possible retarget to Line 12, an existing disambiguation page? Fork99 (talk) 05:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 22 September 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, Left guide (talk) 04:32, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Line 12. I note that this redirect corresponds to the line termini of Expo MRT station on the Downtown Line), but because there is no RS that references the line termini number, it can't be a plausible search term. That being said, if a reader is still using the (MRT) suffix, the reader is most likely looking for some metro line (whether Singapore or otherwise) and thus retargeting to Line 12 (dab) is appropriate. =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 16:09, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Line 11 (MRT)

Line 11 (MRT) → Downtown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Singapore does not refer to its MRT lines by numbers.

Not only that, we don't even have a 11th MRT line. Seloloving (talk) 03:18, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ per similar previous multi-nomination at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 9#Line 4 (Singapore MRT). Fork99 (talk) 05:44, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, since "MRT" is ambiguous, possible retarget to Line 11, an existing disambiguation page? Fork99 (talk) 05:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 22 September 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, Left guide (talk) 04:31, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Line 11. I note that this redirect corresponds to the line termini of Bukit Panjang MRT/LRT station on the Downtown Line), but because there is no RS that references the line termini number, it can't be a plausible search term. That being said, if a reader is still using the (MRT) suffix, the reader is most likely looking for some metro line (whether Singapore or otherwise) and thus retargeting to Line 11 (dab) is appropriate. =JaventheAldericky= (Would you like to talk to me?) 16:08, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Little Whining

Little Whining → Places in Harry Potter#Number 4, Privet Drive (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

As we all know, "Whine" and its participle "Whining" are a verb, totally separate from the fictional town of Little Whinging. I don't think this is a plausible misspelling, as basically every other variation of the Dursley's address already exists as a redirect. I would argue there is no clear target for this redirect, without context. I'm nominating this as Delete as unhelpful. TNstingray (talk) 15:23, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undecided. I personally wouldn't search this village under anything other than Little Whinging but AFAIK this name is either a pun or a direct allusion to the verb to whine. — Tonymec (talk) 19:24, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:24, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If your native dialect uses "whinging" for "to complain, especially in an annoying or persistent manner" (Wikitionary), you won't make this mistake. If your dialect uses "whining" for the same concept, you probably won't think of this connection, and you'll remember the original "Little Whinging" without realising its meaning, so you won't need this redirect. Basically the only people using this redirect are randomly curious about usage ("hm, does Wikipedia have an American English version of this title?") or making random typos. We don't need a redirect for dialectal variations that won't be used by people looking for the subject of the article, and we don't keep absolutely every typo; scroll down for the "2019 Wellington local elctions" section. Nyttend (talk) 03:53, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big gene

Big gene → Gene (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Originally merged into the target, this is no longer mentioned. "Big Gene" also appears to be a name of Gene Deal, as well as some character mentioned at List of Rolie Polie Olie episodes. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:36, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I can find no sources that support the (personally unverifiable) book citation. Though there is apparently a gene known as BIG[16][17] for which we do not have an article. ⇌ Synpath 18:38, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The rule at WP:RFD#DELETE #8 is to consider deletion if it's not mentioned at the target and it's "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name". Redirects should not be deleted if the connection to the subject is obvious to most people, or if the redirect is correct but not appropriate for inclusion in the article, such as {{R from brand name}}. . There are licensing/copyvio problems with deleting this; very few {{R from merge}} pages should be deleted. We could make it a WP:DAB page to Gene Deal and the other pages, though. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:24, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Just to note, the nickname is listed at Gene Deal's infobox only, and is unsourced. The merged content was at the target for about a year after being merged, then removed. It was a couple fairly banal sentences, and I don't think that should necessarily stop us from deleting the redirect if that's otherwise appropriate. This is someone boldly merging article A into article B, someone else reverting the merge, and then article A later being deleted, which should be ok. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2019 Wellington local elctions

2019 Wellington local elctions → 2019 Wellington City Council election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible spelling error ―Panamitsu (talk) 02:58, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not needed. Schwede 66 21:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; this was a previous title of the page, but only for about sixteen minutes, so it likely didn't attract links from other websites. This would have qualified for R3 speedy deletion had someone noticed it soon after creation. Nyttend (talk) 03:58, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:17, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vincian

Vincian → wiktionary:Special:Search/vincian (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The meaning discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 21#Vincian is no longer included in the Wiktionary lemma, so aligning this with da Vincianda Vincian would seem to be most sensible. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 02:41, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not sure about the argument in this nomination statement, but redirecting a term to a Wictionary search instead of a Wiktionary page seems misleading, soft redirect or not. (Has {{Wiktionary redirect}} always been able to detect if a page exists on Wiktionary?) Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It gets a few views per day, presumably because of the link in Gay men's flag but since the purported meaning is not included at wikt:Vincian it doesn’t help readers. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:12, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TRUMP (disambiguation)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

September 27

Tristiania

Tristiania → Major depressive disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. The pre-BLAR version was apparently a misspelling of tristimania; there is a book by that name about bipolar disorder, not MDD, that was published after this article was written. Speedy deletion was denied in 2012 with the rationale "if someone searched for it, a redirect is preferable." Google assumes Tristiania is a misspelling of Tristania (band). This is most plausibly an {{R from misspelling}} for Tristania but is ultimately meaningless. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:18, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete ambiguous misspelling. Content pre-BLAR is unsourced and poor quality. ⇌ Synpath 20:17, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bipolar personality disorder

Bipolar personality disorder → Bipolar disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

~~Delete~~ erroneous title likely to cause/further confusion. I considered refining this to Bipolar disorder#Comorbid conditions but readers would be better served by finding no article here and turning a general internet search where many articles address this confusion head on. The redirect creator's edit summary indicates that they shared this common misunderstanding. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:52, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I put the quoted phrase "Bipolar personality disorder" into my Favorite Web Search Engine and got no results. I asked Mr Google and found a page full of unreliable sources like Quora and healthcare providers' business websites. I don't therefore think that readers are well served by a general internet search. I do think this should be tagged with {{R with possibilities}}. I think that pointing it specifically to Bipolar disorder#Differential diagnosis (which talks about the difference between borderline and bipolar) would be okay. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted phrase only turns up Quora and similar slop because it is not a valid clinical entity. However, without quotation marks there are many hits that describe bipolar disorder specifically or the relationship/confusion between bipolar and personality disorders. These are mostly not RS's we could cite but they provide reasonable primer and dispel the common misunderstanding. I might be able to get behind the Differential diagnosis refinement but definitely oppose tagging as {{R with possibilities}} because "bipolar personality disorder" is not a valid construct and no article should exist at this title; a redirect that anticipates and corrects this misconception might be. An R to section would be an improvement here as it does not suggest that "bipolar personality disorder" is a correct synonym. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:53, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with targeting Bipolar disorder#Differential diagnosis. Without a source I would oppose any attempt to explain why people are searching for this non-thing. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:28, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find the redirect plausible despite being inappropriate (Bipolar is a mood disorder). As previous replies highlight, users might search the term based on a misconception. Judging from the poor quality of top results for this phrase on Google, I think having the redirect page listed there might help said users to become better informed. Maybe something along the lines of:

"Bipolar personality disorder" may be a misspelling of Borderline PD or bipolar, a mood disorder."

in the redirect, stating explicitly that the phrase they searched for is not valid. iris 5:49p, edited 6:08p 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 09:56, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think another reason we might want to have this redirect (or disambiguation) page is with the fact that BPD often gets misdiagnosed as bipolar (including me).

iris 6:05p 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 10:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have thoughts on whether the #Differential diagnosis section link achieves or keeping it as-is best achieves this? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 11:15, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I agree that #Differential diagnosis is a more appropriate / less confusing target.

I'm tempted to also add "[this phrase] is a misspelling" beside the link, just to make it unambiguously clear. iris 3:48p 海盐沙冰 _{/ aka irisChronomia / Talk} 07:46, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve added {{R from incorrect name}}. It’s not reader-facing, though. I think the best we can do is point people to the article/section. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:20, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with retarget to Bipolar disorder#Differential diagnosis, and with tagging it as an incorrect name (and clarifying as needed at the target page), as well as opposing tagging as "with possibilities". As I see it, this should redirect confused readers to the correct information. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:50, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to the DDX section of bipolar as I have heard this term used irl due to confusion between the terms. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 22:23, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(nominator update): Support refining to Bipolar disorder#Differential diagnosis (the "DDx" section) as alternative to deletion. Erroneous but common terms do make for good redirects although care should be taken to not perpetuate misconceptions. What tips the scales for me here is that we have an article section that comes close to addressing the misconception head-on by at least partly addressing the actual relationship between these disorders. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:51, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative perception

Alternative perception → Schizophrenia#Stigma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as vague. Supposedly a proposed name for the disorder per the pre-BLAR article but I can find only scant reference to this online. The phrase is often used as part of a general description of schizophrenia or psychosis but not as an alternative name. Mostly, the phrase has unrelated uses. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:27, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Light cylinder

Light cylinder → Pulsar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Originally created as a redirect to light cone, and retargeted to pulsar a couple of years later with this rationale. There is no mention in pulsar (although it has been explained on the talk page), nor is it mentioned in light cone. It is mentioned in Centrifugal acceleration (astrophysics), which appears to indicate that the term is used both for pulsars and active galactic nuclei. While web searches for "pulsar light cylinder", "pulsar diagram", and "light cylinder active galactic nuclei" do indeed come up with results, just searching "light cylinder" returns light fixtures. As such, I'm not sure whether to retarget or dabify. — Hydrogenation (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Lichtzylinder" (Light cylinder) is also mentioned in the german article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar, but not in the english article. This is the only article in german Wikipedia where it is mentioned. Waldmaus (talk) 11:32, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a notable topic. A source like Horvath, J. E. High-Energy Astrophysics uses the term once, in a figure caption. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:38, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The astrophysics usage appears to apply to a couple of related contexts but is not specific to either and is not explicitly defined on en.wiki. Even when I do a Google Scholar search for light cylinder I get unrelated physics usage, including some where it's used to mean light-weight cylinder[18][19] and at least one where I think the meaning is cylindrical light fixture although I'm not sure I understand correctly.[20] --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:11, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Young, Gifted and Broke (documentary series)

Young, Gifted and Broke (documentary series) → Young, Gifted and Broke (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete: The redirect refers to a 1999–2001 documentary series; the target refers to a 1989 sitcom. The documentary series should be a redlink until an article is created. OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 22:16, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:22, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skitsafrantic

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

Implausible misspelling should be deleted. Possible vandalism; history suggests it was created as a joke. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:00, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google search reveals a non-notable individual using this spelling as a social media handle and a fanciful WWE reference but none of the Quora and Reddit posts you would expect from genuine misspelling. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:22, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Failure to recognize what is real

Failure to recognize what is real → Schizophrenia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Inappropriate target. Could plausibly refer to delusion or denial but I would delete. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:54, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to psychosis: unable to distinguish, in one's experience of life, between what is and is not real. Paradoctor (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is also a more general feature of delusions, which are a feature of psychosis, and could reasonably be interpreted as consistent with some formulations of denial or denialism. Google mostly suggests agnosia but also delusional disorders, anosognosia, and a number of other topics. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:00, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also: Derealization --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:31, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Psychotic drugs

Psychotic drugs → Psychosis#Psychoactive drugs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Psychotic drug → Psychosis#Psychoactive drugs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as vague. The phrasing is ambiguous for substance-induced psychosis, psychoactive drug, psychedelic drug, antipsychotic and possibly others. It is not correct terminology for any of these so not appropriate for a dab. Antipsychotic is probably the best target if there is one. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:44, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Antipsychotic makes the most sense to me Dr vulpes (Talk) 23:01, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Redirect to Antipsychotic. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:14, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Drugs commonly alleged to induce psychotic symptoms include [list] at target gives exactly what I was seeking via the term. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect/retarget to Psychoactive drug, which is a better target than the current one. I oppose retargeting to Antipsychotic, because those are the exact opposites, despite sounding similar – that would be like redirecting "good" to "bad", or "up" to "down". (I agree with the nom that the term is an incorrect one, but since it could be a search term, at least send the reader to the closest correct match, where it might be appropriate to have a hatnote telling readers about antipsychotics.) --Tryptofish (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, antipsychotics are a class of psychoactive drugs, not the "opposite". Paradoctor (talk) 21:21, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you mean, but I was trying to indicate that "psychotic drugs", whatever that means, is the opposite of medicines used to reverse psychosis. I see your point below, that it's not a good search term, but I think it could be search term used by confused readers, and I would rather send them to the right place than to leave them confused because we decided that we should not honor a flawed search strategy. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to indicate that "psychotic drugs", whatever that means, is the opposite of medicines used to reverse psychosis. 🤦 Paradoctor (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Facepalm back atcha. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could be search term used by confused readers, and I would rather send them to the right place than to leave them confused because we decided that we should not honor a flawed search strategy. The challenge is that psychotic drug(s) sounds close to multiple different targets. On what basis do we decide which real thing editors are most likely looking for with this bad search? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's a very good question, and the best I can offer is to send them to a relatively broad topic, where they can start reading and then decide if they want to look somewhere else, and that's what I was aiming for by retargeting to Psychoactive drug. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:45, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This makes sense, thanks for expanding on your thinking. I'm on the fence. On the one hand, Psychoactive drug is the umbrella category that includes all the other possible targets. On the other hand, it barely addresses the topics we think readers might be looking for, and we are still only making a best guess at what they might mean by psychotic drug(s). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All results I found for this term are either partials of "anti-psychotic drug", or of "psychotic drug user(s)". This term is not in use, and not a good search term. Paradoctor (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Psychoactive drug. This seems to be the most sensible option. Article "Psychoactive drug" includes both the psychosis inducing substances as well as antipsychotics and more. Ion Soggo (talk) 20:58, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I.C.E.

I.C.E. → Ice (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'll let Wikinav tell the story on this one: United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement is the primary topic for the acronym I.C.E. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 21:21, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiNav doesn't actually distinguish incoming redirects. This could just be ICE traffic instead. --Joy (talk) 08:03, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. Someone using this search term is looking for an acronym and by far and away the primary topic among acronyms on that dab page is the US agency. I would also support retargetting ICE there as well. Obviously the target page will need a hatnote back to the bad if either or both are retargetted there. Thryduulf (talk) 15:35, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose could easily be looking for internal combustion engine where the pedantic form is "I.C.E." -- 65.93.183.109 (talk) 04:18, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They could but the evidence is that it isn't the primary topic - the very significant majority of people using "I.C.E." want the US agency so we should take them directly there. Hatnotes exist for those who want other uses. Thryduulf (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per WP:DIFFPUNCT. I think a discussion about ICEICE might be more helpful, as I.C.E. is not generally how Immigration and Customs Enforcement is spelled (it is generally ICE). I also think this is a potentially WP:RECENTISM, as the data on WikiNav is only from August and July. Furthermore, as ICEICE redirects to Ice (disambiguation) it is unclear how many people from I.C.E. specifically versus ICE are seeking out the article on United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement or possibly on other topics like the internal combustion engine. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 16:43, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

google.com.tr

Google.com.tr → Google Search#Domain names (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:17, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Censorship of Google#Turkey is relevant to this domain, although it isn't mentioned there. Thryduulf (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IPhone 5SE

IPhone 5SE → IPhone SE (1st generation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 April 13 § IPhone 5SE – no consensus

The phone in question has never been referred to as 5SE, only "iPhone SE" or iPhone SE (1st generation). If this redirect exists, then why don't we have redirects like iPhone 8SE to disambiguate between 2nd and 3rd gen of SE? And if this redirect should stand, why is it not called "iPhone 5SSE" if the SE 1 is based on the 5S? thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 19:35, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it was a name that was used before Apple announced the actual name. See, for example, [21] [22]. Warudo (talk) 19:52, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems harmless and to reflect terminology one used to refer to the specific subject. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean we should create all the other ones. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:13, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:39, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

320x200

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sky Is Not Blue

Sky Is Not Blue → Lemon Demon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; works by the name of "The Sky Is Not Blue" have unreferenced mentions at Joy Jones and Yousef Emadi. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague with no notable referent. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:49, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
or Weak retarget to Diffuse sky radiation#Color. This is the target for Sky Is Blue and several related phrases. When I Google sky is not blue I get one hit for Lemon Demon on the firs page and the majority of the hits discuss the perceived color of the sky. When I use quotes around "sky is not blue" I see more of Lemon Demon on the first couple pages but still many results discussing the subject of Diffuse sky radiation#Color and many hits for The Sky Is Not Blue by Joy Jones. As noted by the nom, Jones's book is mentioned in the article. It turns up more his than Lemon Demon. But it's only a partial title match. Admittedly, the capitalization is odd for this redirect, but so are several of the other redirects to Diffuse sky radiation#Color and this perennially interesting topic is a more appropriate target than a song that is not mentioned anywhere on en.wiki. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:04, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as it's the name of a song by Lemon Demon. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7csTssBIKgo If you think that it needs to be mentioned in the article, then feel free to expand the article's list of albums to include the list of all the songs on each album. Eventually, someone will probably make a discography page, and then it should point to that. Right now, this serves readers who are trying to remember who wrote that song. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:34, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What Will Happen Will Happen

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Flamingo Legs

Flamingo Legs → Lemon Demon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention at target. Debatable if retargeting this somewhere on the Flamingo article would be helpful, but that might be an option. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:44, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:07, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or weak retarget to Flamingo#Description. Their standing posture is a defining characteristic but I think this can safely be deleted. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:42, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I Know Your Name

I Know Your Name → Lemon Demon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention at target, but probably could be disambiguated between Laughter (Ian Dury & The Blockheads album), Live the Life, Bee and Flower, The Strange Familiar, The Sick-Leaves and Galen Crew. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:06, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DABify per nom. Only include Lemon Demon if there is something to substantiate the connection; that decision can be made and revisited after the dab page is published. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:39, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lip biting

Lip biting → Body-focused repetitive behavior (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
🫦 → Body-focused repetitive behavior (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'm incredulous that the pathological behavior described at the target is what most readers think of with "lip biting" and all but certain the emoji is never used this way. I suggest retargeting 🫦 to flirting but there may be better options. Several sources describe it usage this way, or as indicating sexual arousal.[23][24][25][26][27] Keeping lip biting as-is may be the best option but I'm nominating these together for full consideration. I am not proposing deletion. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:41, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the usual list of emoji pages, 🫦 is also mentioned at Jennifer Daniel (illustrator)#Unicode and emoji work. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:29, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do not keep I don't know if there is a PRIMARYTOPIC, but I'm pretty sure BFRB is not it. It should be noted that, besides the deliberate use in flirting and sex, (non-harming) lip biting is also a form of stimming. Furthermore, the term is ambiguous with "biting someone else's lips", as an erotic behavior. Paradoctor (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per my below, change my !vote to Disambiguate lip biting and redirect 🫦 there. Unless a clear primary topic can be demonstrated, of course.
See prior emoji discussions here: 🤭, 👩‍💻, 🛋️, ⏫/⏬, 🫸/🫷, 🤪, 🙀, 👯‍♂️, 🫥, 👾, 🧑‍🦳, 👏, 💨, 😶‍🌫, 🤗, 😬, 🏚️,☄️, 💁‍♂️/💁/💁‍♀️, 🫗, 🔞, 🏴󠁭󠁭󠀱󠀶󠁿, 🔥, 📗, 🫟, ⛓️‍💥, 🥘, 🥙, 😆, 💇‍♂️/💇, & 🫈. Enix150 (talk) 01:23, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TLDR. What's the relevance to this discussion? Paradoctor (talk) 01:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why the contribution is unsigned but I'll chime in. While I don't think we need to review every prior emoji discussion each time a new one comes up, the history provides relevant precedent for how we have handled these. WP:REMOJI gives a more succinct summary. Emoji redirects are rarely deleted. When the meaning is obvious we point to the subject that corresponds with its meaning (🦁 → Lion). A few like Eggplant emoji (🍆) have their own article and a few are a soft redirect to Wiktionary where they are defined in detail. Others point to Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs or List of emoji or a similar list/article where they are included. I still favor Flirting for 🫦 but Jennifer Daniel (illustrator)#Unicode and emoji work would be a reasonable target since it provides some interesting background on this emoji, or one of the aforementioned pages that lists numerous emojis. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:22, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unicode defines the symbol as BITING LIP,^[1] so the emoji goes wherever lip biting goes. The problem is that "lip biting" has several very different meanings, and, prima facie, no primary topic. Writing this, I realize that the issue here is how to disambiguate. Assuming nobody finds actual data supporting a clear primary, lip biting should be a dab page. Paradoctor (talk) 03:39, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose pointing 🫦 and Lip biting to the same target on the basis of the Unicode definition since the emoji has a fairly well-documented meaning or set of related meanings that does not include BFRB, Dermatophagia, or Stimming. In addition to Flirting, Sexting is another plausible target for 🫦. I would not create a 🫦 dab page so if I a single target can't be agreed upon then I would point it to one of the pages where it is listed. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:18, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Uhhh... ^{[citation needed]}? Paradoctor (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What more do you need??? I provided the link to WP:REMOJI describing how these are typically handled. REMOJI includes a link to the 2023 RFC at WP:😃↪️📊2️⃣, which summarizes the consensus for emoji redirects as: discrete target if unambiguous, else page that serves to disambiguate, else list of symbols. (I'm not aware of an example where a dab page lives with the emoji symbol as the title, but I am aware of examples like 🥙, which redirects to a set index article that serves a dab-like function.) @Enix150 (I think) provided links to multiple past emoji RfDs, which you dismissed as tl;dr. I provided five links in the nomination that describe the 🫦's use in flirtatious messages, often to indicate sexual arousal or anticipated sexual activity. This is consistent with the descriptions at Emojipedia and Urban Dictionary. Admittedly, these aren't the highest quality sources but the standard for an appropriate redirect is not the same as what we require for an actual article title. We frequently use slang, nicknames, and informal terminology to redirect to the appropriately named article when there is sufficient evidence of unambiguous usage or that the redirect is a reasonable synonym for or subtopic of the target. The official Unicode name is a consideration in these discussions but when actual usage differs from the official name, common usage prevails or we point to a list of emojis or a page where the specific emoji is described. What citation do you have to support 🫦 being predominantly used to mean any of the subjects that have been suggested for the phrases "biting lip" or "lip biting"? Creating a Lip biting dab page and pointing 🫦 there makes sense only if there is evidence to support a coherent set of topics to which "lip biting" refers and evidence that 🫦 is frequently used to refer to all or most of these same entries. Otherwise, it's appropriate for these to have different targets. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:01, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If that is your takeaway from the "sources" mentioned, then there is really nothing to say. Paradoctor (talk) 17:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget 🫦 to Flirting per nom. Do not delete. And retarget Lip biting to Dermatophagia where lip biting is briefly mentioned. Enix150 (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, Dermatophagia is worse than BFRB. Lip biting is also mentioned there (at the current target). Google, Google Scholar, and DuckDuckGo all turn up hits for BFRB on searches for lip biting so our current target is at least consistent with search engines. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:49, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel that strongly either way about it, keeping Lip biting as a redirect to BFRB is fine by me. I honestly thought an article would've been written by now on Lip biting as a topic. Enix150 (talk) 01:26, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-17.0/U170-1FA70.pdf

Shout shout let it all out

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

If the world was ending, I'd wanna be next to you

If the world was ending, I'd wanna be next to you → Die with a Smile (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Lyric that isn't mentioned at target article. Suonii180 (talk) 06:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still it exists. Redirects are cheap, people seem to forget this quite frequently. Keep. 2804:388:4108:F363:1:0:64BF:EBEC (talk) 21:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unlikely search term. Lyrical phrases do not need redirecting to the song. Lavalizard101 (talk) 10:17, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Unambiguous {{R from lyric}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:28, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Shhhnotsoloud. thetechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 19:38, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a seemingly random lyric from the song and an unlikely search term. Wikipedia is not a lyrics database. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:1B56:14B9:F321:AFC6 (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this unmentioned topic, this lyric is not discussed on the page so people who search for the lyric expecting information related to their term will not receive it. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:27, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Space Train

Space Train → Neil Cicierega (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. A different usage of the term occurs at London Underground 2009 Stock, and Fabbri Group includes a roller coaster by this name. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 10:26, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig in addition to the two uses noted in the nomination, there is also List of Late Night with Jimmy Fallon games and sketches#Space Train (see also Race Through New York Starring Jimmy Fallon#Ride), an episode of Fireman Sam (see List of Fireman Sam episodes#Series 10 (2016)), a concept mentioned at List of Japanese inventions and discoveries#1930s, a video game mentioned at List of arcade video games: S, a musical group that Ben Besiakov was previously a member of, a ride at Fun Spot Amusement Park & Zoo and a concept at Charles Bombardier#The Solar Express. I'm not sure absolutely all of those meet dabmention standards, but at least some of them do. Thryduulf (talk) 10:51, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:27, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. Nominator's rationale is not a good reason for deletion but for disambiguation. I think I've also seen a classic book featuring a train in space; I couldn't find it, but in the search process I found Night on the Galactic Railroad, which I've not heard of before, but it's still a space train. Nyttend (talk) 19:47, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate. I would have guessed that this would refer to Galaxy Express 999 or it's adaptations but there really are many space trains: Galactic Whirlwind Sasuraiger (a mecha transforming into train) and Starcross (novel). MKFI (talk) 10:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Germanic cuisine

Germanic cuisine → Germanic peoples#Culture (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete there is no such thing, Just as there is no Romance cuisine, no Slavic cuisine, no Indo-European cuisine. --Altenmann >talk 15:21, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The existence of this redirect is vaguely ridiculous, particularly as it redirects to a section that doesn’t discuss cuisine.—-Ermenrich (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per the two previous comments.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Ermenrich. I might add that I've just nominated Category:Slavic cuisine for deletion as well, which was originally created by nom, and nom has agreed to its deletion. NLeeuw (talk) 08:14, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Identity cards in the United Kingdom

This seems to be an overspecific redirect. There are multiple aspects to ID cards in the UK, including the ID cards issued during WWII, the general debate about whether we should have an ID card scheme and how it should function and the new digital ID scheme that is now being talked about. — Smjg (talk) 13:49, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is an article about the history of ID cards in the UK, not just a specific instance of that. It would be reasonable to pull out an article about the Identity Cards Act 2006, its background and context, but that's not what this article is. Revert the move and restore the original title. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 13:55, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to revert to. The 2006 Act article is all there ever was. Identity cards in the United Kingdom and National identity card (United Kingdom) were both created as redirects to Identity Cards Act 2006. So what is really needed is a new broad concept article (at Identity cards in the United Kingdom?) which describes the 2006 Act in brief and adds material about the latest Cunning Plan™. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:49, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a look at the history. The article was moved from National identity card (United Kingdom) to its current title on 4 November 2010. The edit summary said "refocusing article on 2006 act, rather than the cards in general" but, looking further back, I see that it was always primarily about the 2006 act and the stuff that led to it. On this basis, I think the best plan is indeed to start a broad concept article. This would cover all of the aspects I've mentioned. The Historical and international comparisons section can be used as a starting point for the content about the wartime scheme. And we should see how much of the content of the Objections to the scheme section is relevant to ID cards generally, or aspects common to multiple ID card schemes, actual or proposed. — Smjg (talk) 16:28, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ctop

Template:Ctop → Template:Collapse top (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Now that we have contentious topics (CTOPs) and the TM:Contentious topics family of templates, I think we should replace all uses of this redirect. Then, we should either delete this redirect or retarget it to TM:Contentious topics. Toadspike [Talk] 12:42, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are 1085 transclusions of this shortcut. [28] Toadspike [Talk] 12:44, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are over 1000 uses of this template shortcut as mentioned above, and this would just break old revisions of pages for no good reason. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:1B56:14B9:F321:AFC6 (talk) 22:59, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - theres over 1000 yses of it and its well known in many editors brains. for Contenious topic, the short handle is “ct” like WP:CT/GG so there is not a real risk here as its a solution in search of a problem. This Rfd has caused the warning that theres an RfD on this on hundreds of pages right now. Raladic (talk) 07:39, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If wikiterminology really has evolved such that "CTOP" commonly refers to "contentious topics", I don't have strong feelings about replacing this shortcut with something like "coltop", but I'm not sure that shift is sufficiently demonstrated. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 17:44, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:AINTBROKE. This is part of a series of collapse/hat/archive shortcut templates which all follow this format, and all have companion template redirects such as {{cbot}}. For the purpose proposed by the nominator, {{ctops}} is available and would not require breaking thousands of discussions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:29, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Not broken, there's already a considerable amount in use, and contentious topics have WT:CT. I was brought to this discussion because I was going to use {{ctop}} to keep a comment tidy. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 18:42, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nov 5 2024

Nov 5 2024 → 2024 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not sure US election are important enough to have a date. Even yes, this should retarget to 2024 United States elections A1Cafel (talk) 10:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is just one of many events that have happened on this date. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 10:48, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per ArthananWarcraft; we are a global encyclopædia, not a collection of US events. — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 13:56, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2024 November 5 per precedent as the best target. J 947 ‡ ^edits 23:32, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus national cricket team

Belarus national cricket team → Culture of Belarus#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bolivia national cricket team → Culture of Bolivia#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bosnia and Herzegovina national cricket team → Culture of Bosnia and Herzegovina#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Chad national cricket team → Sports in Chad (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Djibouti national cricket team → Culture of Djibouti#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
DR Congo national cricket team → Democratic Republic of the Congo#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
El Salvador national cricket team → Culture of El Salvador#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Eritrea national cricket team → Sport in Eritrea (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ethiopia national cricket team → Ethiopia#Sport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Faroe Islands national cricket team → Faroe Islands#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Guatemala national cricket team → Guatemala#Sports (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Honduras national cricket team → Sport in Honduras (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Jordan national cricket team → Sport in Jordan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kazakhstan national cricket team → Sport in Kazakhstan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kosovo national cricket team → Sport in Kosovo (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Cricket isn't mentioned in any of the target pages. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 25#Algeria national cricket team is a similar previous RFD which I didn't want to overload.-MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:03, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. — Hydrogenation (talk) 20:58, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note articles about the Belarus and Ethiopian national cricket teams (and others not nominated here) were deleted at AfD in 2014 - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belarus national cricket team. Thryduulf (talk) 15:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. It's worth noting that the El Salvador team implicitly exists, given mentions at both Mexico national cricket team and Costa Rica national cricket team but it would be confusing for someone searching for information about the El Salvador team to arrive at either one of those articles (and see also WP:XY) even if there were in-depth coverage of them. We have no coverage of cricket in any of the other countries here, let alone national teams specifically. Thryduulf (talk) 16:01, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bahrain's

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Fiji's

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

KEG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited

Walküre 699-035

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Russian invasion of Ukraine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn

September 26

Marco (upcoming film)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Portrait of a Family (film)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#Portrait of a Family (film)

Transpeptidation

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

Straight to the point – Reasons 1 and 5 of WP:RFD#DELETE:
Transpeptidation → delete
Transpeptidase (disambiguation) – three options:
→ 1: delete both target page and this redirect
→ 2: delete target instead, move its contents into this redirect
→ 3:^{[added. 12:30, 28 September 2025 (UTC)]} make target into an article, make this redirect into an actual disamb page as named so.

Both link to a disamb page; you'd think the page with "(disambiguation)" literally in its name/title would be the disamb page, but no! It also doesn't make sense to redirect "transpeptidation" to "transpeptidase" – that's like redirecting polymerization to polymerase, and the latter is just a disamb page anyway (despite not having "(disambiguation)" in its name/title). I also don't think that a disambiguation for transpeptidase needs to exist; it's a class of enzymes, it's not exactly a "may refer to" situation since nobody uses the word to mean specifically a particular protein, unless they specified that protein. Since I don't have enough knowledge for either subject to make them into articles myself, I decided to choose deletion, hoping it becomes a red link somewhere for someone see and turn it into an article.

If I recall correctly, I only just discovered transpeptidation/-ase because I saw the former word mentioned in peptidyl transferase center, and I tried to wikilink that until I discovered... (Perhaps no wonder it wasn't hyperlinked?) And that's why we're here now. CheckNineEight (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: @CheckNineEight: I've combined these into a single listing. I will update the link at Transpeptidase (disambiguation) so it points to this discussion. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:03, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You might have also missed this: Transpeptidase – which serves as the {{R with possibilities}} rather than Transpeptidase (disambiguation).
Can you also fix the link at Transpeptidation, by the way? CheckNineEight (talk) 00:47, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ~~both~~ Transpeptidase (disambiguation). The reason we have redirects like Transpeptidase (disambiguation) is described at WP:INTDABLINK. Transpeptidation is ~~usually~~ often discussed in the context of transpeptidases; the same is not true vis-à-vis polymerization. Perhaps a one-line description of transpeptidation could be added to the dab page although that might not survive clean up. It may be an {{R with possibilities}} but I'm not sure a description beyond what's in the enzyme articles is warranted. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:16, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, because transpeptidation is the process of joining amino acids or peptides (peptide bond formation), and it's not exclusive to transpeptidases (e.g., peptidyl transferase center; i.e., the word is found on the following articles: Translation (biology), 23S ribosomal RNA). CheckNineEight (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to deleting transpeptidation. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:33, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad it's decided only Transpeptidase (disambiguation) should be kept. Also, I forgot that I had a 3rd option for that, which is: swap it with its target and make Transpeptidase – the one without the parentheticals – into its own article (no deletions, but no more redirect – just an article and a disamb). Speaking of options, I realized that I could have worded my original post much better, and I also forgot to put "(disambiguation)" in "Transpeptidase – two options:". (Can I edit my post?) CheckNineEight (talk) 05:09, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the 'transpeptidase' label is clear enough but you can edit it to add '(disambiguation)'. It's always good to exercise caution around changing the wording in discussion posts but in this case it isn't likely to mislead and you can always add an updated timestamp or make a note about the change. There's some general guidance at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Editing own comments. Transpeptidase is a good candidate for a set index article. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:28, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drifter (upcoming film)

Drifter (upcoming film) → Sung Kang (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This nomination is basically a contest to the redirection to its current title per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drifter (upcoming film). (Note: I chose not to do a WP:DRV for this since I do not think that would have been applicable since I'm debating the redirect, not the article.) Unfortunately, since the content that was formerly at this title was deleted, I cannot validate the problem I am about to state which should result in this redirect being deleted rather than redirected:

The fact that one of multiple potential biographical subjects (see Draft:Drifter (upcoming film) for reference) was chosen as a redirect target for this redirect is a combination of WP:UNDUE, WP:RSURPRISE, and WP:XY issues. (I also made this point at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaadhal Konjam Thookala.) This redirect really should be deleted per WP:REDLINK in the event the subject ever becomes notable enough for an article, or at the bare minimum, not be a redirect pointing towards any biographical article. (With all that being said, by default, I have no opposition to targeting to a valid non-biographical target [provided one is found].) Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, reviewing WP:NFF, which is seemingly the guideline cited for why this title was redirected, there is no mention anywhere in it for where such titles of WP:NFF-failing subjects should be redirected ... heck, there's not even a mention of guidance to have these titles redirected at all. (Also, @TheLongTone, KingArti, Meters, ReaderofthePack, and Bovineboy2008: Pinging participants of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drifter (upcoming film) in the event they wish to participate in this discussion.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get what you're saying, but the general consensus at WP:FILM has been that a movie can redirect to a valid target as an alternative to AfD. The validity of the target and whether or not the film actually merits a mention on Wikipedia is kind of murky. For example, back in March there were some articles nominated for deletion where this guy had come to Wikipedia to promote himself and his documentaries. All of the coverage was either local or unusable for establishing notability. Even the local stuff was kind of iffy because the guy's dad was a former mayor, so it's not impossible for the dad to have pulled some strings to get the paper to cover his son. I'm not going to name the guy's name, but this was a very clear attempt to promote himself. He even did the half-truth things, where he took very small claims and tried puffing them up to make his part look more important. One of his films was redirected to a list of films about a major war. Both of the sources used to justify including it in that page were local. I brought this up at WP:FILM and the consensus was that the redirect would be a valid enough alternative in situations like that. Admittedly they were looking at it more generally, but in so doing were supportive of a redirect in that case.

My point in bringing that up is that if WP:FILM is going to argue that some guy's promotional articles could redirect to an already lengthy film article, they're going to support redirects for something like this, where there are actual famous people involved and sourcing from mainstream outlets. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:11, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense that the article for the writer-director-producer would have details about an upcoming film. As a general matter, I think the person, studio, etc. most associated with an upcoming film is a plausible target if there is suitable coverage. I'm not sure NFF should provide more explicit direction than that but AfD discussions should consider whether any redirect makes sense and not just pick a random person whose name has been associated with a project. On this specific case, I'm on the fence. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:18, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolis (upcoming TV series)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Undecaploid

Undecaploid → Polyploidy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Undecaploidy → Polyploidy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. Occurs at Ploidy#Polyploidy, but I would argue that should be removed since there is barely any attestation for that term looking at a Google Scholar search (the more correct "hendecaploid" seems to be slightly better attested). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:29, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be making a lot of "not mentioned" nominations to delete redirects, and I wish you would stop. The rule at WP:RFD#DELETE #8 is to consider deletion if it's not mentioned at the target and it's "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name". Unless both of those apply, a "not mentioned" argument is not a reason to delete a redirect. It's not actually enough for it to be merely unmentioned.

The fact that this is a less common word is exactly why we should keep this redirect: People are less likely to recognize the uncommon word, and if they search for what it means (e.g., a student reading an older paper), then we should send them to the relevant page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:58, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFD#DELETE not mentioning a reason for deletion does not mean other valid reasons do not exist. Most unmentioned redirects are, in fact, not synonyms but other related search terms. And my opinion, as well as general consensus in nominations of this kind throughout the years, is that a reader is not helped by a redirect from a term to a page that does not provide meaningful information on that term, even if the topic is somehow related. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 17:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Refine to Polyploidy#Types where I have now added content. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:08, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 17:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna's chinchilla coat

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Michael Jackson: History

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#Michael Jackson: History

Arena Ponte Preta

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Team Cherry (developer)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#Team Cherry (developer)

Ras v12

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#Ras v12

Cryptozooelogy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

IPA symbols for Voiced post-palatal affricate

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Marjorie Jacqueline Simpson

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Template:Colorblind

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 3#Template:Colorblind

Attack on London

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

First Raid on Uchiza

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Big Fruit

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Battle of Uchiza (1989)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Battle of Uchiza (1987)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ranghad (Rajput): A Historical Overview

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Disney Live Action

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 4#Disney Live Action

North Korean Missile Crisis

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ryan Attiyeh

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

August 29th, 2005

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

January 1, 2025 New Orleans attack

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

beaver chompy boys

Beavertooth → Chainsaw (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Beaver tooth → Chainsaw (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Beaver Tooth → Chainsaw (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

would just retarget to beaver#characteristics, though results actually seemed torn between beaver teeth, woodcutting equipment, and woodcutting equipment manufacturers. thus, i'll just suggest retargeting the latter two and deleting the first since most of the results seemed to have the words separated consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:26, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the lot. 'Beavertooth' just isn't a notable (even to the level for a redirect) term, in relation to chainsaws or chainsaw chain. Or else the Canucks are keeping this hidden from here in Europe. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Beaver tooth per nom. However, in terms of the refining, the information at #Evolution is what interests me more than what is available at #Characteristics. So probably do not refine. Jay 💬 20:58, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:28, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all → Beaver per nom and Jay. I also get a lot of hits for tools and woodcutting, though not specifically woodcutting, but a defining feature of these charismatic animals is surely the primary topic. Since the teeth are covered in multiple sections of this featured article, better to send to the main article rather than pick one section. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:52, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fan maker

Fan maker → Hand fan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

apparently created as a temporary redirect for... some reason. regardless, i think there's at least two things this could mean, and i don't think either would have fitting targets. on an unrelated note, most of the results i got were about makeup consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:13, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In American football, it's usually the quarterback. Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. For context, see Worshipful Company of Fan Makers. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:36, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i'm not saying that article should be taken straight to afd... but i am saying it only seems to have one actually usable source, and likely wouldn't survive an afd

also it still ignores other definitions of "fan", "maker", and "fan maker", and doesn't actually prove any affinity with hand fans specifically, i guess. hell, it doesn't even specify the kind of fans they make consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"The company was incorporated by a Royal Charter in 1709": they're not talking about air conditioning or football. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:27, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague; it could just as easily refer to manufacturers of mechanical fans. It also seems an unlikely search term without any sort of relevant info anywhere, anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because of the company, which is obviously notable, regardless of the current poor sourcing. It's a several-hundred-years-old organisation with hundreds of years of dead-tree coverage. Neither of the delete votes matters — the first is a joke, and if we have another good target, that makes this a candidate for disambiguation. Nyttend (talk) 19:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither target is reasonable. "Hand fan" is not a reasonable target for "Fan maker", for as I already explained. In yet more detail, it's not realistic or useful to create redirects of the form "X maker" for every type of object "X" we have an article about. As for the company, I too question its notability, but either way, this is an WP:RASTONISHing target. In fact, there are a handful of existing links of "fan maker" in use, none of which mean the company. And before you get too excited, the solution to that, of course, is to unlink "fan maker", and re-link "fan" to "hand fan". 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree that in general 'X maker' should not redirect to 'X' unless it is unambiguous and, ideally, there is some discussion at the target. The phrase here is too ambiguous and I agree that proposed targets would be baffling, at best, in almost all cases. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:11, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not baffling at all. In most of the cases in enwiki, "Fan maker" means someone who makes hand fans. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - i hoped this would go without saying, but citation needed. and more importantly, reason to have this as the target needed when even fan (machine) has more info on how they're made. the target has surprisingly little info on the actual production processes of the multiple types of hand fans it mentions, so the readers who wouldn't be surprised would likely be disappointed consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 20:50, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - Source: counting uses at [29]. We could put a hatnote at the current target {{redirect|Fan maker|makers of powered fans|Fan (machine)}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:08, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muchina

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

September 25

Kirk shooter

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: moot

Utah valley shooting

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 3#Utah valley shooting

Spatial singularity

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

Immgration

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ford Frick*

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Slash cities

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bunny wabbit

Bunny wabbit → Rabbit (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

there's currently no elmer fudd langauge wikipedia consahn _{(gwave) (obituawy)} 18:03, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

50/50 Dewete/Wetawget to Elmer Fudd since that actuawy has a wittle bit of discussion of his speech. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:29, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 20:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dewete. I got a chuckle out of it but it's not a genuine misspelling. It's also not clear which is the primary topic and an unserious dab page isn't very encyclopedic. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:19, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wetarget to Elmer Fudd or New Looney Tunes, see Wabbit for clawification. Many bunny-wabbit-rewated topics; Elmer Fudd, Wabbit Twouble, The Wabbit Who Came to Supper, Wackiki Wabbit, The Wacky Wabbit, Wideo Wabbit, etc. CNC (talk) 00:37, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A rather unlikely search term, based on the rhotacism of Elmer Fudd. He typically calls Bugs Bunny a "wabbit", not a "bunny wabbit". Dimadick (talk) 07:16, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Kirk related rds

Charlie Kirk's wife → Erika Kirk (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Charlie Kirk shooter → Tyler James Robinson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Criteria R8, unlikely and implausible search terms. From what I can tell from experience, we simply don't do such rds. Gotitbro (talk) 19:41, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep they seem to he correct, and get people where they want to go. Though "shooter" could be retargetted to Assassination of Charlie Kirk. "Wife" was a particularly common manner of address in the 20th century. Wife of Charlie Kirk and Mrs. Charlie Kirk would also be one of those forms. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:16, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Charlie Kirk's wife" and "Charlie Kirk shooter" are pretty common from what I've seen because people often search for information about a persons spouse or an individual involved in a specific event by using a descriptive phrase rather than a proper name. Deleting them would only make it harder for people to find information they’re looking for. WhatADrag07 (talk) 23:18, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"harder for people to find information": Not really, at the the end of the day we aren't Google. Gotitbro (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, keep "Charlie Kirk's wife". I arrived here after searching on literally that term expecting to get details of his wife.--A bit iffy (talk) 06:26, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy retarget Charlie Kirk shooter → Assassination of Charlie Kirk. BLP violation. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy retarget Charlie Kirk shooter → Assassination of Charlie Kirk per WP:BLPCRIME, see also Kirk shooter. CNC (talk) 00:14, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, nonsensical 2804:388:411E:9B72:1:0:7F06:BC29 (talk) 07:16, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Charlie Kirk shooter per above, this is a very plausible search term but unless and until somebody is convicted of or confesses to being the shooter it should not redirect to a specific individual. Keep Charlie Kirk's wife as plausible and harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of the Assassination of Charlie Kirk page is that there is now consensus for saying he confessed. Czarking0 (talk) 03:55, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Charlie Kirk shooter "speedy retarget" proposal is now moot, because the target became a redirect, turning this into a double redirect, causing it to target Assassination of Charlie Kirk, removing the underlying BLP concern. Keep both redirects as both are sufficiently plausible.—Alalch E. 18:02, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the wife and retarget the shooter

Czarking0 (talk) 03:54, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget (speedily) shooter per others, same reason as speedily closed #Kirk shooter above. Delete wife redirect as a bad case of WP:BIOFAMILY with there not being something encyclopedic worthy between Kirk and his wife and an improper usage as no incoming links demonstrates and could also be shorthand for f.e. funeral speech. Respublik (talk) 07:52, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Land-Tenure in the Christian Era

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

WasabiXML

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#WasabiXML

Slaveowner

Slaveowner → Slavery (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slave owner → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slave-owner → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slaveowners → Slavery (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slave-owners → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slave owners → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slave-holder → Slavery (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slaveholders → Slavery (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Slaveholder → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Enslaver → List of slave owners (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should point at the same target. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 17:50, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Slave master, slavemaster, and slave-holder all redirect to Slavery; while slaveholder redirects List of slave owners. Should these be added to the listing? I don't think there's enough distinction between all these terms that they would point to different targets. @ArthananWarcraft --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:22, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added Slave-holder, Slaveholder and some others to the list. There is also a dabpage titled Enslavers ~~which might be a better target for Enslaver~~. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that all redirects should be targeted at slavery. The outlier makes no sense to be redirected to a different page. Felicia (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Target all → List of slave owners. These are all terms for a particular role in slavery and should point somewhere specific rather than the broad coverage at Slavery. There's also the Enslavers dab page which I would cover to a redirect; a hatnote pointing to StarCraft (video game)#Computer expansions could be added to List of slave owners. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:50, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
retargert all to slavery. Enslaver is not the same as slave-owner, and neither is slave-holder. Enslaver can be slave-catchers. And slave supervisors can be assigned rights as slave-holders, who do not actually own the slaves. Renting out and borrowing slaves did exist. Slave catchers frequently aren't the slave owners, but they did enslave the people they caught, when getting fresh new slaves. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:10, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many dictionaries and usage notes define these terms as synonymous and the usage in Slavery reflects this or at least does not consistently make these distinctions. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:24, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The list article is not appropriate target because it is not a definitive list. It is not like a political office that would be a definitive list. Thus the only article available is the base article. Unless someone wants to add a large intro section about what a slave owner is, and how it can be variously defined, the list is not a proper target. The list is also vastly biased for the European colonial era. There are so many slaves in antiquity, and in non-European cultures, that the list isn't even funny in its focus. Even Biblical slave owners like Abraham are missing. -- 65.93.183.109 (talk) 22:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to slavery since people are more likely to be looking for information about the practice of slave owning, IMO, than a list of people who owned slaves. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to slavery. The List of slave owners is a valid directory of documented, notable slave owners, but probably isn't what someone searching for a more generic topic is looking for. pburka (talk) 02:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

99 Nights in the Forest

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of botanical cryptids

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Paradote

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Paradote

Mike Jack

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Mike Jack

Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C.

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C.

Kha'y

Kha'y → Wine#History (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

a vintner (scientific term for people who make adult grape juice) from ancient egypt or something. currently unmentioned. is apparently an r from merge, though i genuinely don't see what could have been brought in, and even if something was, it's long gone (aside from coincidentally citing the same book that served as the blar's only source). while i found a couple sources, i'll have to check them in a while, though they might not be reliable, and seem to only have the text string in them by coincidence

also unmentioned in egyptian wine, by the way consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:51, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Formerly a stub for a person attested from goods in Tutankhamun's tomb. Seems like maybe worth mentioning in that article and then redirecting there? If any images of the goods could be tracked down that seems like the thing to do to me. --Slowking Man (talk) 04:51, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention has not yet been added to Tomb of Tutankhamun.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:27, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Either Delete or redirect to list of ancient Egyptians. The source for the original article was Vintage: The Story of Wine (1989) by Hugh Johnson. I know nothing about that book, but I'd be more comfortable with an Egyptological source. But I don't think Kha'y, or any variant of that name, is mentioned in the books about the tomb on which the tomb article is based. As he was reportedly a royal chief vintner, there might be reference to him in some other text—but I looked at Who's Who in Ancient Egypt (1999) by Michael Rice, which is the closest thing I know of to a biographical dictionary of ancient Egypt, and Kha'y is not listed there. A. Parrot (talk) 18:58, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a Khay (vizier) at List of ancient Egyptians but this doesn't appear to be the same person. Their name is also rendered Kh-'-y in the article. I'm not familiar with transcription schemes for Ancient Egyptian but if Kha'y is another variant I would retarget to Khay (vizier), otherwise delete. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:17, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bladed article

Bladed article → Knife (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

defined, seemingly primarily in uk law, as "any article (object) with a blade". this means knives are counted, sure... but so are arrows, spears, inordinately sharp sporks, saws, glaives, great swords, axes, and glass shards. so... retarget to blade, even in absence of a definition of the term in wikipedia (at least that i could find)? consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:31, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

and as it turns out, i seem to have a case of the Big Dumb™. the term is actually defined at offensive weapon#bladed article defences... but i also don't think that'd be a fitting target, because it only defines the term in the context of doing weapon things with them, so it doesn't really change my suggestion consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:38, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget to Offensive weapon#Bladed article defences. I'm "weak" since I'm not opposed to the redirect being deleted outright since I'd imagine this redirect has a better target or even WP:REDLINK potential. Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Steel1943's target may the best we have, I'm not sure it's better than deletion? It describes a narrow aspect of UK "bladed article" law. For example, a different aspect of the law is mentioned at Offensive Weapons Act 2019#Part 3. Other aspects are briefly mentioned at Knife legislation#United Kingdom (specifically in the subsections #Case law and #Scotland). Perhaps an overview of the topic could be added to Offensive weapon or Knife legislation#United Kingdom. Blade and knife are both too broad (and knife is simultaneously too narrow, in some ways, per nom). Delete unless a suitable target with appropriate definition/scope of coverage can be found. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:06, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
honestly, yeah, deletion might just be better consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 15:25, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the proposed and suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:15, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to blade ; "bladed article" literally means "bladed thing", which is not UK-specific -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but the phrase seems to be UK-specific. That, and the word "article" is nowhere in Blade. Steel1943 (talk) 12:57, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cape Verde national cricket team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2 redirects to a fangame that is barely mentioned the target yayy

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#2 redirects to a fangame that is barely mentioned the target yayy

Algeria national cricket team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of Victorian newspapers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#List of Victorian newspapers

Acidic acid

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Fernwood Park

Fernwood Park → Roseland, Chicago#Fernwood (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

represents a city park in Chicago but redirect had no info about the park itself Nickvet419 (talk) 19:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ without prejudice to adding content about the park. This is a plausible search term for the housing development discussed at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 10:35, 23 August 2025 (UTC) See updated !vote below. Thryduulf (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it could confuse with Fernwood Park Historic District in New York. A Fernwood Parkway may be created though. Jay 💬 06:06, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, A1Cafel (talk) 04:58, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig. Having done some more searching for this, the primary topic in my results was very clearly a caravan park in Shropshire followed by a housing development near Newark-on-Trent (presumably in Fernwood, Nottinghamshire but neither appear to be encyclopaedically notable. Of the topics that are on Wikipedia, the Chcicago city park, New York historical district and Fernwood Park race riot (which pipes "Fernwood Park" to Roseland, Chicago#Fernwood) are all about equal. Thryduulf (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig per Thryduulf. Katiedevi (talk) 04:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist to consider the suggestion to disambiguate.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:48, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phantom Luna

Phantom Luna → Nike, Inc.#Sports apparel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nike Phantom Luna → Nike, Inc.#Sports apparel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention anywhere on the English Wikipedia. Previous article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nike Phantom Luna. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 11:02, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, these are possible search term and redirects are cheap. TarnishedPath^talk 11:27, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that this is a possible search term only makes this redirect more unhelpful, since anybody searching for this will not find the content they are looking for at the target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 11:35, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unhelpful. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:12, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nike CTR360 Maestri

Nike CTR360 Maestri → Nike, Inc.#Sports apparel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Only passing mentions for "CTR360" on the English Wikipedia; no mention at target. Article was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nike CTR360 Maestri. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 11:17, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, this is a possible search term and redirects are cheap. TarnishedPath^talk 11:26, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that this is a possible search term only makes this redirect more unhelpful, since anybody searching for this will not find the content they are looking for at the target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 11:36, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unhelpful redirect that does not provide additional information about the topic. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:13, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:44, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Independent house

Independent house → House (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The word "independent" is nowhere in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm pretty sure this is meant to emphasize the stand-alone nature of a "house" as opposed to an apartment/flat, townhouse, etc. I suppose it could therefore be {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} but this doesn't seem useful. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:39, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Single-family detached home as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Detached house, which is the clear primary topic among encyclopaedic subjects in google searches. My first thought was to wonder if this was a synonym of free house (pub) but my research doesn't even support that being a hatnote let alone a good redirect target. Thryduulf (talk) 00:00, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:42, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete could be referring to an independent household, off-the-grid survivalist independence, or a family (house) that is independant of an ancestral house -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:26, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all theoretical uses, but I didn't find any evidence that the term is used in that way in practice to any significant level. In real-world usage there is a single clear primary topic, and I see no reason why we shouldn't redirect there. Thryduulf (talk) 09:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The war in Ukraine

The war in Ukraine → Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Ukraine war → Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
War in Ukraine → Russo-Ukrainian War (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
War in ukraine → Russo-Ukrainian War (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ukrainian War → List of wars involving Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ukrainian war → List of wars involving Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ukraine war → List of wars involving Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
War on Ukraine → List of wars involving Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
War against Ukraine → List of wars involving Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Could mix up with Russo-Ukrainian War which started in 2014 A1Cafel (talk) 17:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Russo-Ukrainian War, which is a more appropriate target. After all, the war started in 2014, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine page is currently about events from 2022 onwards.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Russo–Ukrainian War per above. I forgot I had even created the redirect otherwise I would have probably opened the RfD to move it myself. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 00:07, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per above; also cf. War in Ukraine. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 00:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because the issue is that the Russian invasion of Ukraine article that is mis-titled. It is covering all events from 2022-2025, and that is what "the war in Ukraine" and "The Ukraine war" refer to. News sources discussing "The war in Ukraine" or "The Ukraine war" are referring to the events that have occurred in Ukraine since Russia's invasion in 2022, not the conflict that began in 2014.--JasonMacker (talk) 03:45, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:50, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per @JasonMacker:2601:182:B00:2B10:CD8E:2096:BCFB:10A4 (talk) 04:03, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:17, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine to match Invasion of UkraineInvasion of Ukraine. If that term is ambiguous, so is this. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 09:42, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume the main ambiguity of the "invasion" redirect stems from the 2022 invasion of Ukraine and 2014 invasion of Crimea. Here, Russo-Ukrainian War appears to be the unambiguous primary topic and the correct target (with the hatnote that is currently in place). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 14:02, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what's unambiguous about it being the PTOPIC. Literally the most important war in human history took place (partly) in Ukraine. Thus if anything World War II in Ukraine would be the PTOPIC. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 14:05, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would be as commonly referred to as just the "War in Ukraine" out of context, mainly because it did not only happen in Ukraine. Web search results are certainly biased towards recent events (and only show results related to the Russo-Ukrainian War), but I think I remember RfDs with similarly biased outcomes. In any case, I have bundled seven similar redirects into this nomination, and would not feel too strongly about retargeting all to List of wars involving Ukraine. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:53, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to "Russo-Ukrainian War". This is the correct target, per above. I can understand Ms Tamzin's opinion about the potential ambiguity of these titles, but I do not think any other potential wars are actually called 'war in Ukraine' in practice, except in a purely descriptive manner. The current war, ongoing since 2014, is sometimes referred to as the 'war in Ukraine' in mass-media sources. If we think of the reader first, a redirect seems most appropiate. Any potential confusion can be stemmed with a hatnote to List of wars involving Ukraine at the target page. RGloucester — ☎ 23:06, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Except for two participants, all !voted when the nomination had only two entries. Pinging them for their opinion on the next 7 that were added, or to review their existing opinion on the first 2: A1Cafel, Toddy1, Hurricane Clyde, JasonMacker, and Tamzin. Jay 💬 15:39, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep on all per recent RM discussion. There is one thing that has changed since the nomination first went out that I think everyone should be aware of. The article: Russian Invasion of Ukraine was recently nominated in an RM discussion and the result of it was that they moved it to Russo–Ukrainian War (2022–present). As such, my !vote has changed to a "weak keep". As for why it is weak? I would still support retargeting to list of wars involving Ukraine article as an alternative to keeping them as is. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist so people can respond to Jay's ping.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:39, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(re)target all to List of wars involving Ukraine, since this term is non-specific. There's been a lot of war on the territory of Ukraine. And what is meant being search for will be served by the list. WP:RECENTISM bias is certain here, since WP:NOTNEWSPAPER Wikipedia should not treat such terms as how a newspaper would only reference the currently occurring event. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:22, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to List of wars involving Ukraine per the IP's comment above me. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:27, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Locked page

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: deleted by ERcheck as a G7

Doctor Ivo

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Doctor Ivo

September 24

Lavella

Lavella → Andorra la Vella (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
La Vella → Andorra la Vella (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. No evidence that this is how the target is referred to or that it's the primary topic. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:12, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete my search results were dominated by beauty salons and cane furniture. I did find a small number of misspellings of "Andorra La Vella" as "Andorra Lavella" (which I might create as a redirect) but I didn't see any using "Lavella" without "Andorra". Vella Lavella is an island, but (a) that's in the Solomon Islands (not too far off antipodal to Andorra) and (b) doesn't seem to be referred to as just "Lavella". Thryduulf (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) It's also worth noting that this title doesn't exist in the Catalan Wikipedia, I would expect common alternative names for the only officially Catalan-speaking capital city to exist as at least redirects there further suggesting this isn't useful here. Thryduulf (talk) 23:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Comment: La Vella also redirects to Andorra La Vella. Steel1943 (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added that to this nomination. My initial findings find only partial title matches for Andorra la Vella and other places with the same suffix. Thryduulf (talk) 23:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate, perhaps with Vella Lavella and Gymnoscelis lavella. BD2412 T 23:49, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose a "disambiguate" option at this time since those articles are WP:PTMs. Steel1943 (talk) 09:12, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I too oppose disambiguation - I can't find any evidence that either Andorra la Vella or Vella Lavella are ever referred to as just "Lavella" and there is a clear consensus that redirects from the second part of binomial names (specific epithets?) are not useful. That leaves a disambiguation page with zero appropriate entries. Thryduulf (talk) 11:56, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(679997) 2023 RB

(679997) 2023 RB → List of centaurs (small Solar System bodies)#List (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target list. This was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/(679997)_2023_RB in July, which resulted in the creation of the redirect, but the fact that the target doesn't mention the subject was not brought up. This would be a reasonable redirect if the target list got the extensive update it needs, but until then, I don't see how this is useful. We should retarget to List of minor planets: 679001–680000#997 instead. Renerpho (talk) 23:02, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the object seems to not appear in the current target at the current state, but to be included in the sources used for it, and thus includable in the currently used list as well. Not really sure which of them is a better target. Respublik (talk) 07:17, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sudafed

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

On Wikipedia, Sudafed is a redirect to Pseudoephedrine, despite the fact that if you go into a drug store in the United States and you find pills on the shelf that are sold under the Sudafed brand name, they will definitely not contain that drug. The drug they will contain instead is something else that has been shown to be ineffective for the purpose that it is primarily purchased for, so the current redirect seems actively misleading and thus not good from a health information perspective. Historically, "Sudafed" was a brand name used for pills containing pseudoephedrine, but that drug has been the subject of legal restrictions in the United States for about 20 years that include prohibiting its availability directly on store shelves and special identification and information tracking requirements for purchases. To get around the legal requirements, the Sudafed brand name is being used for a different (ineffective) drug. Although the brand name continues to also be used for pseudoephedrine, the product that is readily available on store shelves is not that one. If you send someone who doesn't know this to the store to buy "Sudafed", they will probably return with the other medication, because that's what they will find on the shelves and they will not know there is something else available if they make a special request for it at the pharmacy counter. (I happen to know this from personal experience.) To make matters worse, the generic name of the other drug – phenylephrine – also looks similar to pseudoephedrine at first glance. The redirect's edit history shows there have been differing opinions about what the redirect's target should be. An alternative target is Cold medicine#Brands. The claim of effectiveness of the other drug was withdrawn by the FDA in 2007 and its ineffectiveness was confirmed by an FDA panel in 2023. Even if the other drug was not ineffective, leading people to information about the wrong drug is undesirable. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Pseudoephedrine#Brand names, where it is listed. It's a reasonable search term that some readers will likely use. I appreciate the complex issues raised in the nomination statement, but those things should be addressed through content at the target page. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:47, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree, since that just exacerbates the problem. At least in the United States, this is primarily not a pseudoephedrine brand name, and that article contains none of this information – and it would probably be inappropriate if it did contain much about it, because such a discussion would be off-topic for a list of pseudoephedrine brand names. I think Cold medicine#Brands may be a better target, because that does not imply the use of a particular chemical ingredient, although colds are not the only reason someone might seek a decongestant. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:10, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to making the target Cold medicines, instead, but the fact remains that Sudafed is currently listed at the target I recommended, where it says: "Sudafed Decongestant (made by McNeil Consumer Healthcare) — contains 60 mg of pseudoephedrine hydrochloride. Not to be confused with Sudafed PE, which contains phenylephrine". The solution to "the problem" would be a brief clarification/correction/update at the target. If kept brief, it would not be off-topic. As noted by other editors below, another alternative, and perhaps the best one, is to recreate a full article on Sudafed. But, whatever the decision is about that, readers will potentially use this search term, so simply deleting it would be suboptimal. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:18, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Two thoughts:
We shouldn't write articles about worldwide brands/products as if the US were the most important frame of reference.

The original, pseudoephedrine-only Sudafed is available behind the counter in the US, complete with the brand-name box. Your local pharmacy probably even has signs up next to the cold medicine shelves that tells you how to get the real stuff.
WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:24, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's a similar situation with Tylenol, which had a prior RfD and is the subject of a current RM. Cold medicine#Brands may be the best option here. I'm not how to assess the notability of an OTC drug brand for having its own article. A lot of these companies don't have SIGCOV but are extremely well-known and offer a range of products with different ingredients, making the brand name ambiguous. (Note that Sudafed PE redirects to phenylephrine, which is appropriate since the 'PE' is specific to this active ingredient.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myceteae (talk • contribs) 22:49, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's worth noting that the medicine sold as "Sudafed" in the UK does contain pseudoephedrine[30] so deletion on the grounds that it doesn't in the US doesn't represent a worldwide view. That doesn't necessarily mean the current target is best, but things are more complex than the nominator presents. Thryduulf (talk) 23:50, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe I made any claim that the situation in the U.S. is the same outside of it, but the U.S. is a major market of this brand, and I believe it has been this way for decades. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to their website Sudafed markets a range of PSE and PE containing products in the UK. This was also the situation described in the article as of 2018. I can't speak to the situation on the ground in the UK but this is similar to the situation in the US. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:10, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is incorrect to say that "the medicine sold as "Sudafed" in the UK does contain pseudoephedrine" – some of it does, but some of it does not. The link provided above shows that pseudoephedrine is sometimes branded as Sudafed, but it does not show that all Sudafed in the UK is pseudoephedrine. Here is a link to some Sudafed for sale in the UK (and another link to a similar one). It does not contain pseudoephedrine. Here is another link to another different Sudafed for sale in the UK. It also does not contain pseudoephedrine. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:30, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: We had a substantial article at the title, Sudafed, until 2016, when it appears to have been rather summarily redirected. It seems obvious to me that with the tortured history of products sold under the brand name, we should have an article at this title. BD2412 T 23:52, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore 2018 version. It can then be updated to reflect the brand's current state. The section on regulations can be condensed and point readers to Pseudoephedrine#Legal status for more information. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:19, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that the US is the only country where sudafed does not contain pseudoephedrine, it doesn’t make sense to change the target when the name is still largely associated with the current target. people searching for sudafed are probably looking for the page on PSE. However i do think it would make sense to add a note that the US version does not have PSE. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 04:24, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to their websites, Sudafed markets PE products in the UK and Australia as well. These products have various names but the boxes all have SUDAFED emblazoned on them in big letters. The old Sudafed article and the current PSE article describe similar situations in all these countries, where one cannot just walk in and grab a box of PSE off the shelf as easily as one could in the 90s. In the US, you can also still get Sudafed branded PSE products from the pharmacist. Does the average reader know that Sudafed and Sudafed Blocked Nose are different? Or that SUDAFED SINUS CONGESTION and SUDAFED^PE SINUS CONGESTION are different? Tough to say. If the old article is restored, there can be further discussion about whether it should live at Sudafed (brand) and whether there is a primary topic for Sudafed. A separate article would provide a prominent place to point people to. I think pointing to a brief description of Sudafed products at Cold medicine#Brands is another reasonable solution, if the brand doesn't warrant its own article. Another option is for Sudafed to be a dab page. This is the current situation with Tylenol though the RM discussion is moving towards pointing this to the brand, rather than the active ingredient most associated with Tylenol, which I find somewhat baffling. Zantac is a dab page, reflecting a change in active ingredient. My sense is that "Sudafed" is still more associated with PSE than any other single ingredient but that public understanding of the situation is poor. The name most accurately describes a brand that markets a variety of products in different countries. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:56, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The PE variant is also sold in New Zealand. In some places, there's also something called SUDAFED^OM with oxymetazoline as the active ingredient, although in New Zealand it appears the "OM" letters are omitted. Even in the US, the "OM" part is not included in the product title on Amazon. There are also no suffix letters on another Sudafed with xylometazoline as the active ingredient offered in New Zealand. The United States, UK, Australia, and New Zealand seems to cover a big percentage of the readers of the English Wikipedia. New Zealand seems to have similar restrictions on the availability of pseudoephedrine as in the US. Searching one particular NZ vendor's site for "Sudafed" yields this; none of the 12 products listed in the top section of that page contain pseudoephedrine. Hidden down at the bottom, marked "In Store only" are two that contain it (and one that doesn't). All with no real explanation of the differences. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:18, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: In the US, the brand name Sudafed contains pseudoephedrine and the brand name Sudafed PE contains phenylephrine. --Whywhenwhohow (talk) 03:15, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll wager that the average person thinks that SUDAFED^PE is "Sudafed". If you look at the packaging, you'll see that the "PE" is in a very small font with a different color that is styled as a superscript. The letters of ^PE seem to be less than half the height of the word "SUDAFED" on most of the packages. Also, as mentioned above, "Sudafed" without the "PE" is not available on store shelves, so anyone looking for Sudafed is only going to find SUDAFED^PE or some other non-pseudoephedrine Sudafed unless they already know enough to ask whether there's something else hidden somewhere. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some "Sudafed" (without "PE" or any other suffixed or superscripted letters except ^®) that doesn't contain pseudoephedrine and doesn't contain phenylephrine either. And here is another one with yet a fourth active ingredient (with no suffix). Those two are in New Zealand. Please see another comment from me above that shows some offerings in the UK. One difference in the UK seems to be that instead of being called SUDAFED^PE there, the phenylephrine pills in the UK seem to just be called SUDAFED without the ^PE. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Retarget to Pseudoephedrine#Brand names - It is clear that the brand has fostered some confusion in marketing phenylephrine under confusingly similar names, and that is unhelpful. But we need to start from the perspective of an information seeking reader. If they type in Sudafed now they land on the page for the drug the brand was named for, but additionally they see a hat note prominently alerting them to the existence of Sudafed PE, containing a different drug. The brand names section suggested by BarrelProof contains the same information. Absent a specific page about Sudafed, this is the best presentation of the information. I don't think we should restore a largely unsourced page on the brand, but there is nothing preventing someone rewriting that and boldly restoring the article. That is, re-creation is certainly allowed. Before that could happen, secondary sources need to be located. The above discussion finds plenty of evidence that this brand is marketed in a somewhat misleading manner, but we don't make articles from original research. If there are secondary sources talking about the brand, an article can be re-created. Otherwise we are in WP:NOPAGE territory, and the article this points to is the best one to maintain the information that best meets the reader's information need. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:16, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tylenol PM

Tylenol PM → Paracetamol#Tylenol PM (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The section no longer exists and the branded product is not mentioned in the paracetamol article. There are several reasonable targets but content would need to be added and it's not clear which is best. The generic drug combination diphenhydramine/paracetamol does not have an article. Paracetamol#Available forms mentions several other combo forms but not one with diphenhydramine, and brand names aren't included in the section. Tylenol (brand)#Medical uses does briefly mention diphenhydramine but it is not explained and the article does not list or describe available Tylenol® products. A standalone article once existed and was BLAR'd. The redirect is used in several articles. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:33, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some description of Tylenol PM should be added to the Tylenol (brand) article and the redirect should be targeted there. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:17, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We don't need to mention all the products under a brand, and if no page covers this, we don't need to invent text just to allow a redirect to exist. A recent RfD came to the same conclusion for Nike products. However if text were added anywhere, Tylenol (brand) would be the logical place and a retarget there would then be okay. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 06:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(nominator) Weak retarget → Tylenol (brand)#Tylenol PM. I've added content although I'm not sure it will survive. Tylenol PM appears somewhat notable within their product line, given its occasional association with drugs of abuse and suicides, as evidenced by the usage in articles with links to the redirect. It makes sense for the article to say something about their product line but I'm not inclined to take on updating the entire article. Alternatively, Tylenol PM could perhaps be covered in a 'Society and culture' section. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At this point the new section edit has not survived, although the page still now mentions Tylenol PM in one sentence. As long as it is mentioned, retarget to Tylenol (brand) is acceptable, although unnecessary in my view. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:40, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

or just retarget Tylenol (brand). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:19, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note Due to the WP:RM closing Tylenol (brand) is now at Tylenol. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:59, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Malo (Louisiana)/Temp

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move without redirect

Big Brother 8 (US)/America's Player

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move without redirect

Xe (company)/oddments

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move without redirect

Tamagotchi help

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Tamagotchi version 4

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Next British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Next British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election

Ice Attack

Ice Attack → We Don't Trust You (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to ~~Ice Attack (disambiguation)~~ ICE attack. Current target is We Don't Trust You, an album containing a non-Wikinotable song by this name that wasn't released as a single. There have recently been two prominent attacks on US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities in Texas. The "ICE" abbreviation is almost universally used in US media to refer to this agency, and entering "ICE attack" in search engines returns mostly news stories about the Texas events. The song is not longer clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Carguychris (talk) 16:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not sure if the nominator is proposing that Ice Attack (disambiguation) be moved to Ice Attack, or if Ice Attack should be retargeted to 2025 Dallas ICE facility shooting. Steel1943 (talk) 16:55, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that Ice Attack (disambiguation) should be moved to Ice Attack. If that's what you mean, I agree. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:57, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943 and @ULPS, yes, the DAB page is the intended target. I will fix the nomination momentarily. Carguychris (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Carguychris: considering we are the only two people to ever edit the redirect (me to create it, you to place the RfD notice) + it getting minimal views, this seems like an uncontroversial move no? ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:01, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does, but I've gotten my hand slapped previously for boldmoving redirects. Also, one of the targets of the DAB page has been AFD'd, although the deletion discussion is definitely leaning towards "no consensus". Carguychris (talk) 17:04, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ice Attack (disambiguation) should be moved to ICE attack per MOS:AT, with hatnotes then added to both ~~Ice Attack~~ We Don't Trust You and ICE attack. That's assuming that some capitalization of "ICE attack" is the correct title for the disambiguation page. Wikishovel (talk) 17:03, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this suggestion. Carguychris (talk) 17:05, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikishovel, I've implemented the suggestion, but I'm not entirely happy with the results. Further comments welcome. Carguychris (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The listing incorrectly said that the dab page was the current target rather than the song; I've fixed it. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It had been corrected. I've recorrected it. Carguychris (talk) 17:32, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The current target, not the proposed target, is the correct page to put there. I've refixed it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:37, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...And I was the one who fixed it first. One of the silliest edit wars ever... Steel1943 (talk) 17:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for the repeated screwup. This has turned into a fustercluck on my account. Carguychris (talk) 17:50, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, no worries...I just got confused when I saw it, and didn't realize the previous back-and-forth...glad it's all sorted out now. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to ICE attack. One could raise a DIFFCAPS objection here, but this feels more like Cold war than Ice Cube–Ice cube. Since people often use all lowercase when entering search terms, "ice attack", "Ice attack" and "ICE attack" can be equivalent but wiki will treat the first two as being the same. I would expect a spike in traffic given that the Dallas "ICE attack" just occurred today. This is a little WP:CRYSTALBALLy so no prejudice to re-evaluating traffic/primary topic, ideally after a few months. I see also that another music entry has been added to ICE attack and that the Alvarado attack has been nominated for deletion. There may be a number of changes that impact this decision in the coming weeks and months but for now retargeting is sensible. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:11, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wasserstoff

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

氮

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Flûte (ship)

Flûte (ship) → Fluyt (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:RFOREIGN: no evidence that the target is connected to France Paradoctor (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is evidence: See list of ship launches in 1746, 1751, 1762, 1766, 1767, 1768, 1781, 1782 and 1783. Mjroots (talk) 05:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:USERGENERATED Paradoctor (talk) 10:52, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Threedecks is a RS. Mjroots (talk) 16:41, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1) You didn't cite Threedecks.

2) Threedecks is not an RS for the purpose of establishing the connection between "flûte" and "fluyt".

3) Threedecks is not an RS, period. It's an SPS with no evidence that Cy Harrison is a recognized expert in the field.

4) Evidence needs to be at the target, not hidden elsewhere.

Paradoctor (talk) 17:17, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Harrison is a published author. He wrote a book on Royal Navy Officers in the Seven Years' War. Threedecks draws on published, reliable sources (like Wikipedia does). Mjroots (talk) 18:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That book is SPS as much as the website. And there is no evidence supporting your claim about Threedecks's sourcing. Definitely no citations I could find. Which is, as I may remind you, a fundamental principle for us: every claim must be traceable to a reliable source. Paradoctor (talk) 18:38, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I say that Threedecks draws on published reliable sources, I mean it!

French flûte 'La Pie' (1746) draws from "Nomenclature des Navires Français de 1715 à 1774" by Alain Demerliac. As does French flûte 'La Chevre' (1751), French Merchant flûte 'Le Laverdy' (1766), French Merchant flûte 'Le Brisson' (1767), French Merchant flûte 'Le Gange' (1768), French flûte 'Le Chameau' (1781), French flûte 'La Lamproie' (1782), French Sixth Rate flûte 'La Désirée' (1783), French Sixth Rate flûte 'La Seine' (1783), French Sixth Rate flûte 'Le Nécéssaire' (1783) and French Sixth Rate flûte 'L'Étoile' (1783). Mjroots (talk) 04:52, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that takes care of 3. Leaves 1,2,4 untouched. Paradoctor (talk) 11:50, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, not even that. Wikipedia content may be reliably sourced, but it is still user generated. One could of course verify that the sources cited support the claim, but then you'd have to cite those sources, not the non-RS work. Paradoctor (talk) 13:15, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:44, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, I put it up for discussion, not necessarily deletion. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 11:02, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a variant language spelling of fluit/fluyt. Mjroots (talk) 05:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If it's different languages, it's not a spelling variant. Paradoctor (talk) 10:50, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've added a bit to the article to explain Flûtes relevance Lyndaship (talk) 06:44, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, updated the redirect accordingly. Paradoctor (talk) 11:01, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just some clarification, since this is not an area where I know a ton, but what is the difference between "flûte" and "en flûte" in French military parlance? Should one redirect to the other? 13:17, 17 September 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llammakey (talk • contribs)
- Flûte is a ship type. En flûte means a ship whose armament has been reduced. Mjroots (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Then there might be a need for a template somewhere (wherever this ends up). Llammakey (talk) 12:25, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RanDom 404 (talk) 14:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nike Zoom KD line

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

床

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#床

Four Mothers (upcoming film)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Four Mothers (upcoming film)

Khmer Knong

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Khmer Knong

Inmmigration to Honduras

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6. An error fixed by the original page author shortly after creation in 2023.

Immgration to Nigeria

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per G6, unambiguously created when fixing an error.

Kuruluş: Orhan season 2

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 2#Kuruluş: Orhan season 2

Abdiqani Shancad

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Long Night (TV series)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Immigrant health in Greece

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Varahagiri, Venkata Giri

Varahagiri, Venkata Giri → V. V. Giri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible search term. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 07:37, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it because Varahagiri is his middle name? And is it his middle name, or first name? And I'm not referring to the second "V". Jay 💬 10:39, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per Telugu names, the family name comes first. I am not sure about the likeliness of this sort of punctuation though. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 16:40, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would this therefore be an appropriate {{R from sort name}} format? J 947 ‡ ^edits 22:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:28, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 03:52, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 04:18, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't habitually do RfD things, so not leaving a bolded !vote. Varahagiri Venkata Giri is an appropriate redirect: it's the correct full form of V. V. Giri, though he was known by the shortened version. The intervening comma is bizarre and I see no reason why it would be a search term. Vanamonde93 (talk) 22:54, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If Varahagiri is the family name (per 1234qwer), why would a comma after it be bizarre? Jay 💬 05:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete without prejudice for recreating not distinguishable between being cheap and useful for someone, or simply an accidental typo. Respublik (talk) 07:26, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Martens

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

September 23

Morning sleep

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kiridashi (knife)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Kiridashi (knife)

Pumpkin Hill

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Pumpkin Hill

Being a Rock Star

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Being a Rock Star

CryptoSanta

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Windows RG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

JohnWicklover1994

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unhealthy narcissism

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Unhealthy narcissism

Walter White falls over

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

!vote

!vote → Negation#Programming language and ordinary language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 January 4 § !vote – delete
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 5 § !vote – no consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 11 § !vote – retarget to Negation#Programming language and ordinary language

Not mentioned at target. The current situation, while the result of an RfD, amounts to an attempted compromise that just splits the baby; either this bit of wikijargon deserves a cross-namespace redirect or it doesn't and should be deleted; in no other situation would we redirect to a mainspace target that merely provides vague hints of this sort. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:09, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or retarget to match WP:!VOTE. I agree with Pppery. The information at Negation is not enough to understand this term, because !vote as used on Wikipedia doesn't just mean "not a vote", but rather reflects a bit of philosophical history of how our decision-making works. The current target is so unhelpful in clarifying this term that someone has added a hatnote there, resulting in a silly situation where everyone following this redirect to the current target is best served by immediately clicking on the hatnote. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:43, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neither the arcane programming term nor Wikipedia's own internal jargon deserves this unhelpful and confusing redirect. Bishonen | tålk 21:47, 27 July 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Keep but shift to a more specific subsection of the negation article. User:Pppery, the target article says, “For example, the phrase !voting means ‘not voting’”. Also, editors in this thread might find a link to the previous RfD useful: link. Regarding the hatnote at the target, it should remain regardless of this redirect, and I don’t see anyone here arguing otherwise. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:59, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That example in the article is both unsourced and misleading; the way !vote is actually used (at least in Wikipedia discussions) means something more specific than just "not voting". The text not voting in the article is wikilinked and leads to the Abstention article; that's definitely not what !vote means around here. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the redirect is not kept then Retarget to match WP:!VOTE. The current target article clearly explains what the prefix “!” means in ordinary language, and gives the well-sourced example of !clue which means clueless. It’s very difficult to search for words that have the “!” prefix, because search engines ignore the exclamation mark even if the whole term is surrounded by quote marks, but I found this source which correctly defines !vote. Anyway, the main thing is, that people who encounter “!vote” should be able to put it in the Wikipedia search box to find out what it means. I don’t much care how this is achieved, but it should be achieved one way or the other. Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:14, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Anythingyouwant's improvements. Readers who read "!" as "Not" should naturally be led to the Negation article. The philosophy behind WP's !vote may be added. The hatnote to the meta term was already there. Another hatnote to Not voting for Abstention, may be added. I don't like the term "ordinary language" in the section title, but that's an article content issue. Jay 💬 06:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:02, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just added to the target article on negation the philosophy behind the “!vote” expression, as you suggested User:Jay. Regarding the term “ordinary language”, we could change it to natural language if you’d like. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with "natural language" is that when used alongside programming language, it sounds technical, as in NLP - Natural language processing or Natural language programming. Jay 💬 06:10, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the opening sentence of the natural language article gives “ordinary language” as a synonym but maybe there are others too. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:04, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wikipedia administrators#Requests for adminship which gives context of how it's sort of a vote but not really. It doesn't currently mention the term but easily could. BugGhost 🦗👻 01:44, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to WP:!VOTE as a useful, acceptable WP:CNR. I agree with Pppery and other comments made here and at prior RfDs. This amounts to a clumsy avoidance of a CNR that sends readers looking for the most common usage on a wild goose chase. The brief mention that has been added to the end of Negation#Programming language and ordinary language is buried after a long, technical explanation and that sentence is liable to be deleted or altered in the future. !vote is an implausible search term outside of Wikipedia jargon. Deletion is a poor option as evidenced by the history of recreation and repeated RfD discussion where CNR is suggested but has yet to gain consensus. A hatnote can be added to WP:!VOTE pointing to Negation#Programming language and ordinary language to further explain the rationale for this usage, and on the off-chance someone not looking for Wikipedia jargon enters this unlikely search term. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:26, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I’ve just inserted a subheader at the Negation article for easier navigation. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do think adding the subsection Negation#Usage in ordinary language is an improvement but I still see this as a workaround to avoid a CNR that would be much more useful. And I maintain the concern that this content could be deleted or substantially edited in the future to remove the !vote example and usage. We can't always predict or account for this sort of 'redirect decay' where a target that once prominently discussed the word/phrase has been slowly edited to remove it years later, but here we have a target that is better (Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion#Not-votes aka WP:!VOTE) and more likely to be stable. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:06, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps worth noting here that “!vote” has been in the negation article for over five years. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:08, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion#Not-votes (aka WP:!VOTE) is the best target and is where this should point. Second best target is Wikipedia:Glossary#!vote. The content at Negation#Usage in ordinary language is background info that will be of interest to some readers but it's not the primary topic for !vote and is not where we should direct readers. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:12, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to ~~Negation#Usage in ordinary language~~ Negation#Usage in colloquial language. The expression is mentioned and explained there and there is even a hatnote pointing to Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion#Not-votes, so I think it is the most appropriate target. Xoontor (talk) 11:14, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion § Not-votes. While I normally don't support WP:XNRs, the continued recreation of this as noted above shows that this likely makes sense as a redirect. While I would say that almost anyone who comes across !vote will be coming across it in the context of something in the project namespace so, WP:!VOTE/Wikipedia:!vote should be sufficient, it appears for some reason it is not. I oppose redirecting to Negation § Usage in ordinary language because I don't really think that the usage on Wikipedia belongs there. While it's not in programming language, it's rather specific jargon for Wikipedia editors, not daily parlance. (Struck after seeing comment from 35.139.154.158, see new !vote at bottom). Casablanca 🪨^(T) 01:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Casablanca Rock, I accordingly modified the target article to say “colloquial” language instead of “ordinary” language. A number of editors here have mentioned that “ordinary language” might not be the best description of how the exclamation mark is used for negation in a conversational manner. Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Negation#Usage in ordinary language. We have mainspace coverage of this term, with a citation also in mainspace. We are here to build an encyclopedia firstly, not take people to our backrooms, so mainspace coverage of a search term is always a priority to target redirects to, if it exists, and it does. Wikipedia !votes end up in mainstream media whenever journalists cover any influential Wikipedia discussion, of which there have been many, and people may want to read about encyclopedic coverage of that term if they want to search for it on Wikipedia. (People in the know, know to search for "Wikipedia:!vote" instead.) There are more people who read about Wikipedia without editing, than there are those who edit Wikipedia and participate in discussions, but it's the readers who we should be accommodating over anything else. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:01, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine to Negation#Usage in ordinary language. This is not a suitable cross-namespace redirect. People searching for !vote in a Wikipedia project context are mature enough to understand the WP: domain. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:21, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is internal Wikipedia jargon, and does not belong in article space. It's best regarded as WP:OR. Either retarget to WP:!VOTE or delete. In the old days this would have been a WP:SNOWBALL. — The Anome (talk) 15:41, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it is jargon. More specifically, it is colloquial jargon. But if colloquialisms or jargon are discussed in reliable sources, then they can be legitimately described in Wikipedia articles, as here. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:47, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to WP:!VOTE. I have always wondered what this meant and thought it was a weird coder thing for one of the tools, that if you said vote, it would mess that up. Finding out that it is programmer jargon is somewhat irritating, as Ive always found != to be unclear vs =/= or ≠, as Im not generally a programmer. I see the arguments for using the negation page, but I think most people looking at this are looking for the policy. As an alternative, can we dab with a policy page and the negation section? Metallurgist (talk) 22:51, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to close oldest log day, given the day's transclusion is not appearing on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion due to WP:EXPENSIVE issues. Reminder that per WP:RELIST, this discussion can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:32, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a little surprised at myself, but Retarget to Wikipedia#Dispute resolution, where there's actually a bit of reasonably context-relevant text about this. I find the mention at Negation to be highly undue, however. Since there doesn't seem to be any other real use of this term, and the search tool makes it hard to include special characters, I think this is the best way to go here. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mostly know !vote from AFDs, so I dont think DR is appropriate. It should lead to something that clearly explains it. Negation would work or WP:!VOTE. Metallurgist (talk) 03:45, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AfD is a kind of dispute resolution in a broad sense (the dispute being whether or not to keep the article). I think retargeting to Wikipedia#Dispute resolution seems sensible. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 02:04, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting to the Wikipedia article’s section on dispute resolution is my second choice, the first choice being to keep targeting the Negation article (in particular the subsection that discusses what !voting means). My reason being that !voting is sometimes used at Wikipedia for dispute resolution but sometimes not. It is often used to learn how different people would edit a particular article and why, before any content dispute emerges. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:16, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Wikipedia#Dispute resolution. This is an absolutely perfect place to put it. It is not undue and it provides information in the context of wikipedia without being an XNR. Thank you 35.139.154.158! Casablanca 🪨^(T) 22:05, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Wikipedia#Dispute resolution per both above. This is a very useful redirect that should exist in some form, and as long as there's a good mainspace target we default to that. There's no mention at Disputes on Wikipedia, incidentally. J 947 ‡ ^edits 22:40, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Yet again ... Relisting since Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion is currently experiencing WP:EXPENSIVE issues that will not allow any transclusions after Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 to appear due to the large amount of calls in the earlier day, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19. Reminder that this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST if consensus can be determined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wikipedia#Dispute resolution. A mention of the term in mainspace, explaining the term from an encyclopedic perspective, is always preferable to a XNR explaining it from a "backrooms" perspective. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:20, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chaotic Enby, I’m just curious if you also considered targeting to Negation#Usage_in_colloquial_language? It’s not an XNR either. Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but as a second choice, as the former gives more information about the relevant processes, while the latter is more semantic. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:03, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syriac people

Syriac people → Assyrian people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Syriacs has already been retargeted from Assyrian people to its own Syriacs disambiguation page, but Syriac people did not follow. Both terms mean the same thing, the plural of Syriac. Syriacs and Syriac people are just two ways of saying the same thing and do not describe different groups. Having them as separate entries gives the false idea that they are different, when they both point to the same meaning. DavidKaf (talk) 15:45, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians Syriacs is a far more ambiguous term than Syriac people, hence why it was moved separately. However, "Syriac people" has often been used as a self-identification for various peoples, including Aramaeans, Assyrians, and Chaldeans, often lumped together under the Syriac designation. The Syriacs disambiguation page states "Syriac people" as referring to another name for Assyrian people, but this is not extensive enough as a new target page. The page with the most relevant information documenting "Syriac people" would instead be at Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Syriac peoples already redirects to Terms for Syriac Christians#Syriac identity, so if we want, we could streamline "Syriac people(s)" to either the "#Syriac identity" section or the more all-encompassing "#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians" section, which includes all the self-designated identities. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians or Syriac. Not an exclusive term, further explanation at original post.

Opinion as nominator. DavidKaf (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it appears to target Syriac in the nomination Oreocooke (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought “target” meant the desired place I would want it redirect to, I’ve now updated it. DavidKaf (talk) 06:50, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the nom says it's targeting Syriac already; but according to the history the original redirect was to Assyrian people instead 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it, it was my fault, sorry. DavidKaf (talk) 06:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect ~~Keep redirected~~ to DAB page Syriac. The possible meanings for the term are explained there, with navigation options. Place Clichy (talk) 22:51, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake in the target, I thought it meant where I would want it to redirect to, not the current redirect.

Current redirect is to Assyrian people, I’ve now updated/fixed it so that the target is Assyrian people and the desired retarget would be the DAB Syriac you mentioned. DavidKaf (talk) 06:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then I agree with that. Vote clarified. Place Clichy (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Strike that, explained below. Place Clichy (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians or Syriac. —Srnec (talk) 05:43, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Syriacs & Syriac people to Assyrian people, keeping Syriac as disambiguation. This is in line with other pages e.g. Armenian/Armenians, Greek/Greeks, Coptic/Copts. The respective "people" articles follow the same pattern e.g. Armenian people, Coptic people/Coptics. Hogshine (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assyrians is redirected to Assyrian people. The issue here is that Syriacs is a very ambiguous term, as is Syriac people. It does not exclusively refer to Assyrian people. I don’t think it’s comparable to Armenians and Armenian people, for example.

I don’t know how to link other discussions, but there was a recent RfD regarding the move of Syriacs from Assyrian people to Syriac. DavidKaf (talk) 08:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Syriac or Terms for Syriac Christians 777network (talk) 18:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Syriac DaB, ambiguous term. Devi van velden (talk) 18:22, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:20, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upon second thoughts, it does seem that Syriac people is a far more ambiguous term than only to be in a DAB. I'd say that Syriac people should be redirected from Assyrian people to Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians, but if consensus wants the DAB, I would not argue against it. DavidKaf (talk) 11:38, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians, non-exclusive name, applied to more than one group of people.

Historynerd361 (talk) 21:11, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changing !vote to Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians. 777network (talk) 20:46, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course redirect! We are not Assyrians or pagans.. Osroene25 (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Osroene25: where would you suggest this link to redirect? The community is balanced between Syriac, a disambiguation page, and Terms for Syriac Christians, an explanatory article, especially its section Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians. Place Clichy (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Changing !vote to Retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians#Ethnic terms for Syriac Christians (from retarget to Syriac). After reading arguments, I am now convinced that the detailed explanations at the target are more informative to users than the dry dab page, especially if you take the people part into account. Most options at Syriac are in fact about other meanings than people, such as alphabet and language. Be careful that there is an entry at the dab page that probably needs adapting following consensus here, currently: "Syriac people, another term for Assyrian people". Place Clichy (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Werq the World Variety Show

Werq the World Variety Show → RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars season 5 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This appears to be a mistaken name for the episode "All Star Variety Extravaganza". No evidence this exists. --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:16, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looked at the RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars season 5 page and up until you linked the "All Star Variety Extravanagza" page the episode was listed as being named "Werq the World Variety Show" [31]. Plus in the episode descriptions it seems to list "Werq the World Variety Show" or "Werq the World Variety Extravanganza" as the name of the challenge.[32] I'd say keep the redirect as that was the name of the episode on Wikipedia for a while, plus what the challenge is called in the episode and episode descriptions, plus it might help to differentiate similarly named episodes from all stars seasons 2, 3, 4, and 6. HighlandFacts (talk) 01:49, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should keep the redirect just because the season page was incorrect before. I am not opposed to keeping the redirect if the name of the challenge is confirmed and mentioned in All Star Variety Extravaganza or another article. Otherwise, I don't see any purpose to keeping the redirect. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:06, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:47, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are yourself the creator and author of All Star Variety Extravaganza where you have mentioned "Werq the World Variety Show" as the title. Hence I don't understand your above statement about if the name is mentioned. Jay 💬 13:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay

Fixed I created the page based on the incorrect title previously used in the list of episodes. "Werq the World Variety Show" no longer appears in the article text. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:49, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion is currently experiencing WP:EXPENSIVE issues that will not allow any transclusions after Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 to appear due to the large amount of calls in the earlier day, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19. Reminder that this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST if consensus can be determined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:46, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rubbage

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

Seems like this word could also refer to Garbage. (Third party searches return results claiming this is a portmanteau mixing the words "rubbish" and "garbage".) Maybe retarget to Wiktionary:rubbage if not delete? Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created this page in 2019 as it was mentioned in the article. Still is mentioned, although I have no opinion on it now. (Edit: (edit conflict) Wiktionary target seems fine.) Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:38, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given wikt:rubbish... ALSO means "garbage", and wikt:rubbage explicitly defines "rubbage" as a dialectical form of "rubbish"... Retarget to garbage. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:32, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:59, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (preferred) or retarget → Rubbish or → wikt:rubbage. This is a dictionary word. It has no special meaning associated with Cruft—the usage in that article doesn't indicate otherwise. Since it is usually defined as a variant of rubbish, and Rubbish has its own DAB page, I'm not sure why we would override that and point directly to Garbage. My sense is that garbage, rubbish, and rubbage are largely interchangeable but there can be subtle colloquial differences in connotation and usage. It's not clear to me whether rubbage is more important as a word, which may argue for the Wiktionary target, or as either of the first two concepts listed at Rubbish. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:07, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to rubbish given the above evidence that is a variant of that word. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:11, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting (though I am WP:INVOLVED) since Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion is currently experiencing WP:EXPENSIVE issues that will not allow any transclusions after Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 to appear due to the large amount of calls in the earlier day, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19. Reminder that this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST if consensus can be determined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:45, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Various Pokémon redirects

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 13 § Various settings in Pokémon – retarget mentioned, no consensus for remainder

Foento City → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fubata town → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Japan Pokemon → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Joe Merrick → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pogeymanz → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pokemon Cultural influence → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pokémon Cultural influence → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pokemon Fans → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pokémon in popular culture → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pokemon! → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
R/pokemon → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Serebii (website) → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Serebii (Website) → Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13 are not mentioned in the target article. The other redirects don't appear helpful.

11, "r/pokemon", is a subreddit, but it is not mentioned in the target article.

- Manifestation (talk) 10:21, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Delete 1 to 5, 8, 10 to 13. Retarget 6, 7 and 9 to Pokémon#Legacy and influences or delete them as well. Media Mender (talk) 11:34, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
refine 6, 7, and 9 per media mender, delete 2, 8, and 10 as vague, 5 as vandalism (and incorrect, it's pokeymans!!), and the rest per nom consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 12:16, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't #8 also be retargeted to Pokémon#Legacy and influences? Seems like a more plausible search term than 6 or 7, if anything. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 15:53, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it's a section on the legacy and impact, not the fanbase. there's some overlap, but not enough imo consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 17:50, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Perhaps one day there will be a section in Pokémon regarding its fan community. If that happens, "Pokemon Fans" and similar redirects could be (re)created. Right now, they have nothing to redirect to. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 19:15, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Per WP:PANDORA or in the case of the popular culture one, WP:REDLINK. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:39, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Serebii (website) is an {{R from merge}} and was merged to the target as per its AfD consensus. A lot of content, including the Cultural influences and Fan community sections, was removed by nom and should be added back, and we can then have a fresh discussion on the redirects. Or renominate in smaller parts with redirects not related to the removals. Jay 💬 09:35, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It should not be added back, because the content was rubbish. That's why I submitted much better content back in 2023. The current Pokémon article is 13.743 words, which really is long enough. - Manifestation (talk) 09:06, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in hopes of avoiding a potential WP:TRAINWRECK.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:45, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that most of these have history from the 2000s: #1 Foento City (unsourced stub), #2 Fubata town (unsourced stub), #3 Japan Pokemon (no body at all, just an image and links), #7 Pokémon Cultural influence (copy of a paragraph from the main article), #8 Pokemon Fans (youtuber-sounding first-person spiel), #9 Pokémon in popular culture (actually resembling a real article, with sources), #10 Pokemon! (redundant stub). Jay has already pointed out the merged content at Serebii, as far as I can tell none of these were merged anywhere. This comment is not intended to imply a keep vote. Rusalkii (talk) 22:16, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quick release

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Biological woman/man

Biological woman → Female (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Biological man → Male (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Biological female → Female (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Biological male → Male (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Biological sex → Sex–gender distinction#Sex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Ambiguous non-definable term. No incoming links for the 2 couplets and likely questionable incoming ones for the latter that should be reviewed and re-targeted appropriately. WP:RNEUTRAL applies (specifically "redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion") as a dog-whistle term used by anti-trans activists that should most certainly not be pointing to male/female but rather to some page like Transphobia if it’s discussed there or else, the redirects should be deleted. The terms use are comparable to another anti-trans coded hate speech dog-whistle phrase “adult human female”, which has its own article dedicated to explaining the use by anti-trans activists. All links appear to have been created not too long ago.
For reference:

TERM TO AVOID: “born a man,” “born a woman,” “biologically male,” “biologically female,” “biological boy,” “biological girl,” “genetically male,” “genetically female”
Phrases like those above oversimplify a complex subject and are often used by anti-transgender activists to inaccurately imply that a trans person is not who they say they are. “Biological boy” is a term anti-trans activists often use to disregard and discredit transgender girls and deny them access to society as their authentic gender identity. As mentioned above, a person’s sex is determined by a number of factors – and a person’s biology does not determine a person’s gender identity.

GLAAD Glossary guide (part of the GLAAD Media Reference Guide used by reputable journalists around the world since 1990 on terms to use/not use in writing).

As for "Biological sex", which doesn't have a singular definition, so the current redirect target (which was quietly changed last year) gives the wrong impression that there is as the article is titled sex-gender distinction. It is also associated as a catch-all dog-whistle term. Some references to that effect - [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. I'd say the most likely target would be Biological determinism if we added a section explaining its use as a dog-whistle, which talks about the conceptual determinism of claiming that there is a singular definition and some of the history like Eugenics and the likes associated with it. Raladic (talk) 07:10, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The two comments below were moved from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 August 26#Biological male, which originally only listed one redirect, but they should be handled as a group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raladic (talk • contribs) 07:34, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, maybe retarget I don't think the current target is a bad one, although matching Biological sex → Sex–gender distinction may also make sense considering how it's used in political discourse these days. If this is retargeted, Biological female (currently a redirect to female) should probably also be retargeted. Anomie ⚔ 21:49, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  No, this would somehow legitimize these non-neutral neologisms. They are typically exclusively used in anti-trans circles trying to define something that scientists agree, doesn't have such a simplistic definition. This by itself may warrant a separate article (since there is plenty of content available in the scientific, and more recently the spill over into the legal, community on the fact that there isn't a singular definition, e.g. [39], [40], [41], [42]) that explains that there is no such thing as a singular "biological sex" definition, but the current redirect to Sex-gender distinction is a distortion as the title implies that an incoming redirect means that there is. So while the 2 couplets could be redirected to Transphobia to explain the dog-whistle term, right now, the only likely target for biological sex I could maybe see would be Biological determinism which talks a bit on the concept of the fuzziness of nature vs nurture and how genes do not make a sex alone. Raladic (talk) 08:04, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Oh, so this whole nomination is about WP:GENSEX activism? Sigh. Anyway, I still !vote Keep, or possibly retarget. I don't see content at biological determinism that seems relevant to these topics, so that target doesn't seem too useful for a (non-activist) reader. The former target of Biological sex you pointed out, sex, seems ok (with male and female kept for the others) but lacks room to mention the sex-versus-gender aspect.
  Re the suggestion about redirecting to transphobia, will I also be seeing you at WP:VPR#Unsalt of Gaza Holocaust arguing for the restoration of the redirect to Holocaust trivialization? That seems more clearly a non-neutral redirect than these, which are reasonable search terms that have been co-opted and poisoned by activists. Anomie ⚔ 12:11, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  @Raladic, just so you know, "biological sex" appears in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, a 1905 [=1.2 centuries ago] work by Sigmund Freud: "It is necessary to make clear that the conceptions "masculine" and "feminine," whose content seems to unequivocal to the ordinary meaning, belong to the most confused terms in science...every individual person shows a mixture of his own biological sex characteristics with the biological traits of the other sex..." While it became more common in the 1970s and 1980s (=before half of Wikipedia's editors were born; three quick examples), Freud was by no means the only writer to use that term in the early 20th century. It should not be considered a neologism. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Retarget to Sex-gender distinction as per Anomie;~~ bundle biological female in with this redirect and target it there as well. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:56, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Now that they've been bundled and there's been further discussion:
  - Retarget Biological sex > Sex as per Myceteae, tag as {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. They're right in that this is really just what sex is, lol
  - Retarget all others > Sex-gender distinction. As per WP:RNEUTRAL a redirect is under far less scrutiny re:neutrality; as it is not seen unless actively searched for, there is no fear that it may shift the opinion of anyone who happens to see it. Worst case scenario, an anti-trans bigot searches for it, lands on Sex-gender distinction, and maybe has their mind expanded a little. The alternate targets presented by Raladic, Transphobia and Biological determinism, don't feel like they would, to me, actively help the reader in any way, especially biological determinism which seems excessively off-topic. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 05:10, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Second it seems valid. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 21:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete first four, as they are not likely to aid navigation. The most common meaning of biological male is trans woman. A lay reader searching that term has presumably encountered it as part of the ongoing anti-trans moral panic, and does not need an explanation of man/male, but rather some article text explaining why everyone in the 2020s has gotten so up in arms about biological people using bathrooms and playing tennis. I don't think a suitable target exists for that right now so delete. –RoxySaunders 🏳️‍⚧️ (talk • stalk) 13:58, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Biological woman/man as ambiguous. The current Female and Male targets are plausible but are too broad. Other plausible targets have been offered, and more may exist. It's possible an article could be written on these topics. Weak delete Biological female/male. Female and Male are probably the best targets for each of these. I find these less problematic than the woman/man pair but they suffer from similar problems and a case can be made for multiple plausible targets. Retarget Biological sex → Sex. These terms are synonymous. "Biological sex" is often used in trans discourse, though by no means exclusively in anti-trans rhetoric. "Biological sex" is also widely used in biomedical literature as synonymous with Sex. I looked at the first 10 uses of biological sex in article space and Sex would be a reasonable target for all of them. Two have it as a piped link to sex and one as a piped like to "biologically" in the construct "biologically female". I agree the internal links would benefit from more thorough review. *Maybe* add Sex–gender distinction to the hat note with {{redirect}} but I'm not advocating for this. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:18, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the next 10 articles that link biological sex and these affirm my !vote. In a majority of the 20 pages I've looked at, Sex is the best target and appears to be what the writer intended. I have found only a few articles where Sex–gender distinction also works and none where it is clearly a better target than Sex. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:23, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as plausible search terms from established terms. Retarget Biological sex to Sex to be more neutral. Retarget Biological man and Biological woman to Man and Woman respectively as the most obvious targets; the articles discuss both biological sex and gender identity and so are both neutral and provide the information a user may be searching for. The phrases may be used problematically, but WP:Wikipedia is not censored. Mclay1 (talk) 16:00, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete first four, (Biological woman, Biological man, Biological female, Biological male) - None of these show any significant traffic in their pageviews (other than when Wikipedia editors are arguing about them). I don't think they are useful in helping people find anything. Myotus (talk) 18:18, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and - redirect Biological sex to Sex, the current redirect doesn't make sense. Denaar (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2025 (UTC) Further Jusitification: "Sex" alone means "the sex act". "Biological Sex" means "Sex as in being male/female". There are times where you can tell from context what someone means, but in academic writing, "biological sex" is used for clarity. Denaar (talk) 13:58, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to Sex assignment § Terminology. Otherwise Delete all unless they are targeted to a specific section of an article, not the generic article itself. Jay 💬 06:13, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly neutral at this time on first four, other than oppose redirection to Transphobia or Biological determinism as too low in relevance and unlikely to be the intended topic. Retarget Biological sex to sex; as noted above by Myceteae, this is a reasonably common phrase in normal biological and medical topics, and serves to disambiguate sex as a trait from common usage of 'sex' to mean sexual intercourse. Crossroads ^-talk- 20:40, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:01, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget variously:
- Biological sex to sex. While "biological sex" could be used in transphobic discourse, it can also be used neutrally, as in the lede of the Sex–gender distinction article, or where "sex" might be misinterpreted as "sexual intercourse".
- Other four to Sex–gender distinction. The fact that a guide lists "words to avoid" indicates that there are people unaware of the problematic nature of the terms and who use them in good faith. If the words were obvious slurs no such advice would be needed. Thus mental retardation redirects to intellectual disability, which article includes discussion of why the former term is deprecated. Analogous reasoning applies to the four suggested retargets; the Sex–gender distinction article has dozens of matches for the string "biolog"; it can inform the reader of the complexities.
jnestorius^(talk) 03:03, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep:

"Biological male" / "Biological female" as these would be the outputs of a molecular diagnostics assay or biochemical assay and thus clearly defined. Chemistryroxpharmacysux (talk) 13:57, 16 September 2025 (UTC)— Chemistryroxpharmacysux (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion is currently experiencing WP:EXPENSIVE issues that will not allow any transclusions after Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 to appear due to the large amount of calls in the earlier day, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19. Reminder that this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST if consensus can be determined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:43, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete first four, Keep last one. As others have noted, biological male/female are ambiguous terms often simply used as dogwhistles, they don't really mean anything. Any link using these as a redirect would almost certainly not be a productive one, and as search terms they aren't doing anything helpful. Keep biological sex as those arguments don't apply, and sex-gender distinction is a reasonable target. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and retarget to a disambiguation, as they are ambiguous terms. Put all suggested retargets from this thread in the disambiguation. Daphne Morrow (talk) 21:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and potentially weak retarget biological sex to sex. While I definitely do know of the negative connotations associated with the terms and there popular usage in transphobic rhetoric, I would still argue that the much more common usage of the term is referring to sex. I don’t really see the validity in the oversimplification argument, as that can be made for virtually any term. Standards for journalists do not extend to Wikipedia. I wouldn’t be opposed to the proposed targeting of the terms to sex-gender distinction however I still think that the current targets are the most helpful. Biological determinism and transphobia are not appropriate targets in my opinion as they are probably not the page that someone was looking for when searching those terms. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 02:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I kind of wish this wasn't a single nomination. I don't have an opinion about the man/woman pair. I think that we could keep the male/female pair, as the current targets work equally well for a discussion of (e.g.) sexual reproduction of birds or worms or gingko trees, even though the nom and some respondents seem to be assuming that this is all about humans. I would prefer to retarget the 'sex' redirect to Sex, but if it's going to be pointed to the Sex–gender distinction article, it should probably be pointed at the Sex–gender distinction#In biology section. Also, I notice that the first four redirects currently have no uses in the mainspace, and I wonder how many edits like this one were made to produce that result. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:52, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, as these are terms used in reliable sources. For instance, in an April 2025 UK Supreme Court ruling: Judges at the UK Supreme Court have unanimously ruled that a woman is defined by biological sex under equalities law. He told the court: "The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms woman and sex in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex. (BBC article) There are also 75,500 search results for "biological sex" on Google using the News tab [43]. Here's a BBC article from 2 days ago: The updated Scottish government guidance says that under the law toilet facilities must be "made available on the basis of biological sex". A CNN article from two weeks ago discussing the terms used by the World Athletics: Per its regulations, World Athletics says that: “‘biological male’ means someone with a Y chromosome and ‘biological female’ means someone with no Y chromosome, irrespective of their legal sex and/or gender identity." An April 2025 article from The Guardian: Transgender rights have become a highly political issue in many countries, with some critics saying the conservative right has weaponised identity politics to attack minority groups, while others argue that liberal support for transgender people has infringed on the rights of biological women.
Regarding the terms themselves being "dogwhistles" or "non-neutral," we have Wikipedia articles about slurs, etc. so I don't think that argument is very compelling. I could perhaps see Biological female/woman/male/man being retargeted to Assigned female at birth/Assigned male at birth, as those terms are used colliqually by some people to refer to AFAB/AMAB people. Also want to point out that the current target of Biological sex is Sex–gender distinction, and the term biological sex appears in the lead; I would support retargeting Biological sex to Sex, too. Some1 (talk) 04:41, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Biological sex to Sex, as it is a more generic term that isn't exclusively used in trans-related discourse. Someone might be typing it to mean "sex" as in the biological trait rather than the activity, without knowing that it is already our primary topic. Regarding the others, I don't have an especially strong opinion: retargeting them to Sex–gender distinction would be my first choice (as it is the context in which they are most often used), although keeping the current redirects or retargeting them to Sex assignment could be an alternative. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:26, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all: this nom in a solution in search of a problem. It is common for conservative activists/writers etc. to misunderstand the sex/gender distinction, but it's very disheartening to see it from a progressive.
To give a brief summary, since there seems to be a sudden spat of confusion, sex is a genetic and biological feature that is immutable. If you have two X chromosomes, you're "female". If you have a Y chromosome, you're "male". Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct that can be changed around plenty. "Woman" and "man" refer to gender, so you could have a man who has two X chromosomes or a man with a Y and an X. However, to avoid confusion, it is convenient to use terms that note that the first man is biologically female and the second biologically male. A woman who has two X chromosomes is also biologically female. To call this well-established terminology a transphobic dogwhistle is ludicrous.
Since "biological sex" discusses this idea in general, it makes sense for it to target the article which discusses the distinction. There is an argument to be made for "biological woman", which is a more unusual and somewhat ambiguous construction, but I don't think deletion is the answer here. The current target is fine, since the reader who searches that up can be reasonably assumed to be looking for sex rather than gender. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 21:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well... technically, the definition of female is "produces ova" and the definition of male is "produces sperm/spermatozoa". It can't depend on the XY sex-determination system, because the words male and female apply to non-human species, too, and some species use other systems (ZW for most butterflies, temperature for all alligators, etc.). WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. However, we're definitely just talking about humans here. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 16:01, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Biological male with no Y chromosome

Biologists don't have a special definition of male/female for humans. The classification of male/female only exists in sexually reproducing species featuring anisogamy, and it works exactly the same for all such species – chickens and humans alike. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per reasoning from Whatamidoing and others and WP:RGW. Concerns over this being a supposedly scientifically undefined term are overwrought. In practice, it’s completely clear what these terms refer to in the vast majority of cases (as evidenced by their widespread usage in sources going back decades to mean simply male/female, absent any kind of subtext). Readers are best served by being redirected to the articles about male/female, not sent down a rabbit hole of debate about gender. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 11:53, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peripheral unit

Peripheral unit → Regional units of Greece (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The term is not mentioned at all in the article (at least not in any language I can read). It appears there may have once been a type of administrative subdivision known or translated to English as "peripheral unit", but the present article makes no mention of this. For English speakers, I think more likely meaning for this term would be peripheral (computer devices). older ≠ wiser 15:13, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Peripheral unit was a disambiguation page with 2 entries: Peripheral; and Peripheral unit (country subdivision), a redirect to Regional units of Greece. περιφερειακή ενότητα perifereiakí enótita is 'Regional unit' but could be 'Peripheral unit'. Article Peripheral does not contain the word "unit". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:37, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore DAB; perifereiakés enótites can indeed be translated to 'peripheral units'. Meanwhile, while Peripheral CAN be argued to be a WP:PTM, I believe it's fine; as wikt:unit definitions 7 and 8 define a 'unit' to be an individual piece of equipment or an item that may be sold on its own, both things that can describe a peripheral in the tech sense. If it's deemed that peripheral is too much of a PTM and the redirect should instead be kept, I'm fine with that-- the Regional units of Greece page already includes a hatnote to peripheral, notably assuming that peripheral unit is a redirect and not a DAB.
...One that shhhnotsoloud added when he BLAR'd the DAB. Fair enough. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:50, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore DAB, as before this edit. The literal meaning of periferiaki enotita is peripheral unit. As administrative regions of Greece are called peripheries in Greek, regional unit is a better and more understandable translation. This meaning being just as legitimate as that of computer peripherals, both targets are equally valid. Place Clichy (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notified Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece. older ≠ wiser 16:22, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore dab per above. Thryduulf (talk) 10:37, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Restore dab", assuming this revision is the disambiguation page in question. Reason being: "Peripheral unit" and " Peripheral" are not synonymous with each other. If a disambiguation page is warranted, then a draft disambiguation page should be created which does not include Peripheral since its inclusion seems both erroneous and a WP:PTM. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as ambiguous without scope for a disambig page per Steel. Agree with Lunamann's explanation of unit being an individual piece of equipment, and while I would support the term for a redirect, I would not, for a dab entry. Readers have other redirects to reach the intended targets, otherwise they may be discussed separately - Peripheral units of Greece, Peripheral unit (country subdivision), Peripheral device. Jay 💬 05:31, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Periphery. I understand the Greek sense per SNSL and Place Clichy's explanations. The computer sense took a bit longer to come around to but searching "peripheral unit" gives some results (eg: [44][45][46]). We already have a disambiguation page that contains both senses, so just retarget there. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:01, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- (answered after relisting) @Tavix: Although my preferred outcome is still to restore DAB, this suggestion makes sense. There's an issue however: Peripheries of Greece and Peripheral units of Greece are at a different level, although one derives its name from the other. Having an entry at periphery for peripheral units is like equating U.S. states and counties. I don't think that entry belongs there. For this reason, I feel restoring an individual DAB is the best, as both targets are equally valid. Place Clichy (talk) 07:45, 30 September 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, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore dab. When I Google "peripheral unit" most of the hits on the first page align with the computer meaning. The Greek reference likely meets long-term significance criterion for primary topic, so dab is reasonable. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:01, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed something like that as well before I voted; I think that may be a case, which happens occasionally, where Wikipedia potentially being erroneous has trained search engines to also be erroneous. Steel1943 (talk) 15:34, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you think search engines are being erroneous? That is not at all my experience and can be easily debunked by analyzing the results. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the past, Wikipedia mirrors and/or Wikipedia itself have influenced search results on third-party search engines, whether intentional/erroneous or not. (Maybe AI has started weeding this out in some aspects, but I'm not sure.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:13, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The results don't have that appearance to me. One thing that jumped out was the number of Google Shopping results for "peripherals" when using the search term "peripheral unit", like mice (mouses?), keyboards, external drives, etc. On the main search I found several definitions (this was on the first page, sourced from Collins) and sites using the term as a descriptor in the computer hardware sense.[47][48][49] --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:06, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting (though I am WP:INVOLVED) since Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion is currently experiencing WP:EXPENSIVE issues that will not allow any transclusions after Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 to appear due to the large amount of calls in the earlier day, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19. Reminder that this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST if consensus can be determined.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael J

Michael J → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Michael J. → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Michael J J → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Michael J. J. → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Michael J.J. → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Michael JJ → Michael Jackson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous terms, these can refer to hundreds of other people. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 17:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Also, Michael J J is an odd way to format this name. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:32, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget the first two to List of people with given name Michael#J where those people are listed. Delete Michael J J. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:41, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldn't make any sense to delete any of these redirects. Typing a name followed by the first letter of the person's family name or middle name is almost as stringent as it gets for a plausible redirect. Either retarget the first two to List of people with given name Michael#J and keep the last one or don't change anything at all.

Michael Jackson is (still) that famous and globally dominant that these redirects make sense to redirect to him. Maxeto0910 (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget the first two to List of people with given name Michael#J and delete Michael J J per Tavix. Michael Jackson is among the most famous people to have ever lived but he is not routinely referred to as "Michael J. Jackson" (in fact, there is another primary topic for Michael J. Jackson). There are numerous people named Michael with the middle initial 'J' and a last name beginning with 'J'. They aren't neatly grouped nor easily identified from the dab page because some of them, including Michael Jackson, aren't commonly known by their middle name or initial and don't have it in their article title. Michael J J has no good target and isn't useful. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:19, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an ambiguous name without a clear target. The initial could easily refer to a last name (like the current target) or a middle name (like Michael J. Fox, for instance). - Eureka Lott 17:15, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there evidence of Michael J. Fox being referred to as simply "Michael J."? That example feels like a WP:PTM to me, but I haven't entirely ruled it out. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is there evidence for any potential target being referred to as simply "Michael J."? I'm not seeing any, and that's another reason why redirects of this nature are undesirable. - Eureka Lott 19:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per original reasoning and per Eureka Lott. Too ambiguous. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all because yep, cannot assume that "J" represents the surname when it could represent the middle name. Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To closer, wait 2 more days, or relist, as the last 3 entries (J. J., J.J., and JJ) were added 2 days later. Jay 💬 05:46, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right communism

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#Far-right communism

Inner derivation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#Inner derivation

Battle of Vinland (1010)

Battle of Vinland (1010) → Vinland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Vinland (1010) – redirect to Vinland

Delete. Not mentioned at target, and not found in any Google-indexed books[50] Fram (talk) 11:29, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is a fandom wiki article about this battle, which cites "The Viking discovery of America: the excavation of a Norse settlement in L'Anse aux Meadows, Newfoundland." Ingstad Helge. Checkmark Books. New York, 2001. ISBN 0-8160-4716-2." That source is available on the Internet Archive at [51], but a naive search for "Battle of Vinland" in it produces no results. I've not looked in more depth. Thryduulf (talk) 14:36, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. More importantly, searching for simply "1010" (or 1003 for that matter) gives no results from that book either![52][53] Fram (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Vinland (1003)

Battle of Vinland (1003) → Vinland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Vinland (1003) – redirect to Vinland

Delete, not mentioned at target, and not in any Google-indexed books[54]. Fram (talk) 11:26, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment [55] has a snippet that says "The history books tell of a historic “Battle of Vinland” in 1003 AD between Vikings led by Leif Eiriksson's brother, Thorvald," however the website is unavailable in the UK (i.e. they don't want to comply with the GDPR) and I got a "too many requests" error when trying to access it via tor so I am unable to say whether it is actually relevant or not and/or to make any comment regarding its reliability. There is also this YouTube video with the description "In 1003 Viking Settlers coming to Greenland started the first war between Europeans and Natives on the North American continent. In today's Small Wars episode I go over the first and second battles of Vinland" but I'm not in a position to watch it at the moment so again I make no comment about its reliability or relevance. Thryduulf (talk) 14:27, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Searching for the 1010 battle also resulted in finding a Military Wiki article about this battle. That article cites "Keneva Kunz (Translator) The Saga of Erik the Red, in The Saga of Icelanders, Penguin Books, New York, 2001. ISBN 0-670-88990-3" but I've not found a copy of that online. Thryduulf (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That first one seems to be a sports article, so I wouldn't consider it a reliable source for this. Other sources don't seem reliable either. Fram (talk) 15:02, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bernadette Villard

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Caesar Barber

Caesar Barber → Fast food (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target. Unclear relevance. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this is a {{R from merge}} resulting from the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caesar Barber (2nd nomination) in 2009. The article has an external link described as "A copy of the Caesar Barber lawsuit" that is a remnant of merge. Drenver split out the relevant section to Criticism of fast food in April 2011 [56], but did not include the Caesar Barber content [57]. There was no discussion I've found about the split or about the removal of the content that was included by consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:19, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Detroit People Mover (Airport)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#Detroit People Mover (Airport)

🫈

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Rebekah

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 22 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 21 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 19 Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 15

Template:Wikipedia community

[1] Joshi, Harit M (10 October 2016). "Without BCCI funds or attention, Ranji outsiders Services fight on many fronts". Hindustan Times.

[2] ttps://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/Unicode-17.0/U170-1FA70.pdf

[1]

[1]

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

Before listing a redirect for discussion

The guiding principles of RfD

When to delete a redirect

Reasons for deleting

Reasons for not deleting

Neutrality of redirects

Closing notes

How to list a redirect for discussion

Current list

October 4

The Hereditary Grand Duke of Luxembourg

Ngaju Wikipedia

Disney Live Action

Ras v12

Team Cherry (developer)

Michael Jackson: History

Kaalgat

Portrait of a Family (film)

Art C. Jones

The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited

Great Expectations (upcoming TV series)

Caste (upcoming film)

Israël

PewDiePie is next

Powdery (mildew)

Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die.

Only Link can defeat Ganon

Gee! it sure is boring around here

Ruby-chan! Hai! Nani ga suki?

Largest(s) City-Metro populations of the Pacific Northwest

October 3

Template:Colorblind

Leaves (band)

All I need is my love tonight

Utah valley shooting

3 Kasane Teto redirects

Competitive mathematics

List of games with Wii-to-DS connectivity

Steve Apple

Ball so hard, motherfuckers wanna find me

CABT

Time Out Abu Dhabi

Surry County High School

Rural Retreat High School

Anti-glasses gang

Iran-backed

Turkishpedia

Operation Cerco 99

2026–27 EFL Championship

1987 Lurigancho massacre

Mathematical olympiads

Men who lie with men

October 2

Paradote

Draft:パリス・ヒルトン

Mike Jack

List of Victorian newspapers

WasabiXML

Wigan Athletic F.C. 8–0 Hull City A.F.C.

Michael McGaharn

Hallejuah (Kanye West song)

The Christmas Collection(Amy Grant album)

Las Muertas

2 redirects to a fangame that is barely mentioned the target yayy

May 25, 2020

ROad Rash

Blade of the Immrotal

Kung Fu Panda (film2)

Knuckles the Hedgehog

Wikipedia:THESIS1

L'AGEFI

Ziltoid the Omniscient (crater)

The Snowball Fight

Cultural heritage of the Nation

A metamorfosis

Next British Columbia Liberal Party leadership election

床

Khmer Knong

Kuruluş: Orhan season 2