Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

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

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	0	16	16
TfD	0	1	2	11	14
MfD	0	0	0	1	1
FfD	0	0	4	16	20
RfD	0	0	0	31	31
AfD	0	0	0	2	2

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

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

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

Before listing a redirect for discussion

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

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

The guiding principles of RfD

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

When should a redirect be deleted?

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

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

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

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

Reasons for deleting

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

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

1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles" (itself a redirect to "Article"), it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, were an exception to this rule until they became their own namespace in 2024. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.
11. 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

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

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

Neutrality of redirects

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

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

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

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

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

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

How to list a redirect for discussion

STEP I.	Tag the redirect(s).   Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page. Please do not mark the edit as minor (m). Please include in the edit summary the phrase: Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]. Save the page ("Publish changes"). If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page. If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If 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.

Current list

May 20

German Film Museum

• German Film Museum → Deutsche Kinemathek  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is incorrect. It would have to redirect to (or be the title of) "Deutsches Filmmuseum", which doesn't have an article in the English Wikipedia yet. I already tried to speedydelte it, but it was declined although the redirect is clearly redirecting to the wrong article. Therefore, there actually shouldn't be much to discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxeto0910 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I've had a look at the article it's targeting and done a bit of an update and cleanup there, as well as checking and fixing articles linking to it. Agree that it could be deleted for now, although it would be nice to have at least a stub article on the other museum. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

It has to be deleted until we have an article about it, as the current link target is just wrong. If you want to write a short stub article about the Deutsches Filmmuseum and correct this redirect by linking to it, you have my support though. Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment/opinion: The target of this redirect is clearly wrong.

However, the correct target de:Deutsches Filmmuseum in the German Wikipedia has currently the following text in it [my rough and somewhat shortened and modified translation from German]: The articles Deutsches Filmmuseum and de:DFF – Deutsches Filminstitut & Filmmuseum overlap thematically. You are welcome to take part in the redundancy discussion or help directly to merge the articles. In de:DFF – Deutsches Filminstitut & Filmmuseum, it says: The Deutsches Filminstitut & Filmmuseum e. V. has been a publicly funded film research institution based in Frankfurt am Main since 1949. In 2006, the Deutsches Filmmuseum, also founded in Frankfurt in 1984, was merged with the Filminstitut, but the original founding name Deutsches Filminstitut e. V. was only abandoned in 2019. The homepage www.dff.film/ also shows the title DFF – Deutsches Filminstitut & Filmmuseum. And: the German Wikipedia page de:DFF – Deutsches Filminstitut & Filmmuseum has its counterpart in the English Wikipedia: en:Deutsches Filminstitut.

Therefore, I suggest modifying the redirect to the target en:Deutsches Filminstitut.

--Cyfal (talk) 11:54, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 17:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. I notified of this discussion at Talk:Deutsche Kinemathek. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 20:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target Deutsches Filminstitut.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:34, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Filmi music

• Filmi music → Filmi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Filmi song → Filmi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Filmi Songs → Hindi film music  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Filmi appears to be music in Indian cinema in general, whereas Hindi film music is only one part of Indian cinema. Filmi devotional songs too talks only about Hindi songs. Filmi qawwali includes Pakistan and Bangladesh as well, while Filmi pop appears to be Pakistan-specific. Apart from the redirects needing to be consistent, should we also make one of these a disambiguation page, in case Filmi is not seen as the WP:BCA umbrella topic? Jay 💬 10:40, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Citation templates

• Citation templates → Wikipedia:Citation templates  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:XNR. I reproduce my comment a related discussion:

...my searches before making this nomination showed that Wikipedia's citation templates are far from the PTOPIC for that title. In fact, it is far more likely that a reader searching "citation template" is looking for an article (or section) on something like this. Yesterday enwiki was viewed by 77.7 M unique devices, but we only have 118,000 active users, and I'd hope most of those know enough to not search "citation template" in mainspace hoping to end up at WP:CITET.

While helping new users is a worthy goal, we should put our readers first, especially in this case where the word does not refer unambiguously to Wikipedia (unlike something like "redirects for discussion" which is unambiguous). Cremastra (u — c) 23:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Citation#Styles with a hatnote to current target. That is where I would expect the redirect to go as a non-Wikipedian. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• @Ca and Thryduulf: That article does not explicitly discuss templates for formatting, only different styles. Cremastra (u — c) 00:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as XNR to pipeworking not actually showing readership wanting citatin skeletons/examples of various citation sytles. OR weak retarget per Ca to Citation#Styles -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget and add a hatnote per Ca. This is a useful and plausible search term for both Wikipedia and non-Wikipedia uses for which we have relevant targets so whichever way you look at it deletion is unjustifiable. The encyclopaedic uses take precedence over internal uses so retargetting there is best. Thryduulf (talk) 23:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Since the nom apparently disagrees with the proposed target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Xbox Series X

• Xbox Series X → Xbox Series X and Series S#Xbox Series X  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should this redirect to a section? The article is about the two, but very similar consoles. Jumping to the section skips an informative introduction. Same with Xbox Series S and variations. Stumbling9655 (talk) 17:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Linguistic elaboration

• Linguistic elaboration → Abstand and ausbau languages  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not in target page. When I opened a discussion at Linguistics WikiProject in late 2023 (archive), no one else found anything in the literature or proposed any possible incoming wikilinks to make use of this redirect, and creator also supported opening this discussion. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 05:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

A GLOSSARY of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor IN ALL COUNTRIES AND IN ALL TIMES

• A GLOSSARY of the Construction, Decoration and Use of Arms and Armor IN ALL COUNTRIES AND IN ALL TIMES → A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration, and Use of Arms and Armor in All Countries and in All Times  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. No apparent reason for this capitalisation, and it seems very unlikely that people would search or link this redirect with its combination of Normal Capitals and ALL CAPS. Nyttend (talk) 02:03, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I am indifferent, but the redirect had been linked at Dhal (shield); I just bypassed the redirect. Citations use Wikipedia's house style anyway, which is Title Case. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 06:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Zldksn flqmtm

• Zldksn flqmtm → Keanu Reeves  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Recently created from the QWERTY equivalents of the Hangul keyboard. WP:PANDORA; we can't have Hangul->English redirects for every article. Anerdw (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• Uhh, what? I see no reason to redirect "Qwerty uiop" to this anglophone actor's article, let alone the comparable phrase for the keyboard in another writing system not used in English. And his article doesn't mention Korea at all, except a brief reference to appearing in a film adapted from something originally produced in South Korea. Finally, if I take the title of his Korean article, ko:키아누 리브스, and run it through this transliteration website, I'm told that it becomes "kianu ribeuseu". Delete. Nyttend (talk) 02:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete just like Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 6#Zldksnflqmtm. Adumbrativus (talk) 02:11, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Template:Collapsoe bottom

• Template:Collapsoe bottom → Template:Collapse bottom  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Template:Collapsoe top → Template:Collapse top  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo; zero incoming links besides Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Template redirects (which tells AWB to automatically bypass links to this "shortcut"). Delete per WP:AFFINITY. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. Unlikely typo. It's a template, so incoming links from outside Wikipedia are unlikely; the only internal links to this page are the one noted by nom and new links generated from this discussion. Anerdw (talk) 01:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. And how about list Template:Collapsoe top too? I would but I'm not sure of the proper procedures (like disabling the redirect). 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 10:14, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

​Bundled Template:Collapsoe top with this nomination. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I believe there were once links that used this upon transfer from some other wiki, can’t remember if it was another language or collapse alternative E. It’s unlikely that problem will come up again, so as the page creator I agree with deletion. CFCF (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

May 19

Starburst (cocktail)

• Starburst (cocktail) → Vodka Red Bull  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Vodka Red Bull doesn't meantion the word "Starburst" in it at all. A quick google search doesn't show many results besides TikTok and the like. The redirect isn't linked from any other pages and is used a few times a week at maximum.

I propose deleting this redirect unless a source can be found to support it, in which case it'd be best to add the information to the Vodka Red Bull page and keep the redirect. FireDragons52 (talk) 21:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WOP

• Wikipedia:WOP → Wikipedia:WikiProject World's Oldest People  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

wop is an ethnic slur in several varieties of English. Even though the target WikiProject is marked as defunct, I think we should get rid of this grossly offensive redirect.

I propose renaming to something inoffensive like WP:WOLD. I have no strong feelings on what the new name should be, and would concur with any other suitable suggestion.

The redirect is linked from 133 pages and its Talk Page from 43. I suggest a bot-renaming to preserve links (outside my skillset) if the consensus is that this redirect be renamed. Narky Blert (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. "... I think we should get rid of this grossly offensive redirect." The redirect isn't offensive. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  It may not be in Lutz, Florida, but it sure as hell is in UK. Narky Blert (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. It's only offensive if it's used as a slur. In this context it's not one. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete The project is defunct, and there is precedent here for deleting per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 15#WP:Fag, WP:FAG, and WP:FAGFP. I don't see any harm in deleting, and any links can be replaced as the nominator suggests. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per precedent at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 15#WP:Fag, WP:FAG, and WP:FAGFP and because the project is defunct. Unless they're just really big fans of 2011 songs no one remembers. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 16:57, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

KIPP: Lead College Prep Charter School

• KIPP: Lead College Prep Charter School → Gary, Indiana  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target Schützenpanzer (Talk) 20:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

House dust mite taxa

• Dermatophagoides farinae → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• American house dust mite → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• European house dust mite → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Mayne's house dust mite → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Euroglyphus maynei → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Dermatophagoides microceras → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Dermatophagoides → House dust mite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Most of these are circular redirects on the page. Per WP:NSPECIES, taxa that meet those guidelines should be redlinked by default. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Support. To encourage article creation. Just picking Dermatophagoides farinae off the top of that list, there are six free-standing articles in other-language Wikipedias. Narky Blert (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  (post-!vote) Comment. A redlink could and should be {{ill}} linked. Narky Blert (talk) 21:37, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:REDYES. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

MOS:V

• MOS:V → Wikipedia:Verifiability  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

MOS namespace is for the Manual of Style, which the target is unrelated to. Either delete or retarget to a relevant part of MOS. I am bad at usernames (talk | contribs) 18:00, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, It seems to me this redirect is more confusing than useful, and retargeting to an MOS page would be equally confusing. Special:WhatLinksHere/MOS:V shows virtually no usage. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 01:37, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Dora Barlaz

• Dora Barlaz → Dora (Dora the Explorer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Wrong name for the fictional character. There are no sources that mention Barlaz as Dora the Explorer's surname. The only other mentions of this name on Wikipedia are in references under two articles, which reveal this redirect's title as the name of a non-notable author, not a fictional character (whose proper name is Dora Marquez). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:CA00:8400:25C8:4CB5:60DB:FBBD (talk • contribs) 08:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete this held an unsourced and most likely false claim that this was the name of a science teacher who inspired Dora, but the only other mention of that I could find is on this BJAODN page. Hoax? --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  Speedy Delete Unless there is an actual notable person with the name or that there is a source that Dora starts using this as her name, and that is unlikely due to Spanish Naming Conventions. Her real name is Doraline Panfilia López Márquez. I also Just created a redirect of her full name. Is this a possible hoax? Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Just to note that I added the RfD tag to this redirect since it wasn't tagged by the nom. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:20, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Nicholas Logan

• Nicholas Logan → Organ Trail (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Michael Abbott Jr. → Organ Trail (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Olivia Grace Applegate → Organ Trail (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I would like to discuss deleting these three redirects. These three actors have other works that (at a glance) they are equally as known for (or even more so) as they are for Organ Trail (film). There is no information on any of these actors in the article, and they could be standalone articles, so I think this counts as WP:RFD#D10, but please correct my understanding if I am mistaken. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 06:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Blank, so that people are encouraged to contribute to the article. Otherwise I would also be okay with delete. Easternsahara (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I apologize, I'm new to RfD, so I'm not sure what blanking entails (what is being blanked?), but it sounds like something that I would also find agreeable. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 03:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

If you are unsure what it means, how would you find it agreeable? Sorry, very strange response imho.--CNMall41 (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Specifically the "so that people are encouraged to contribute to the article", which is in general something I find agreeable. I would like to learn more about what exactly it means in this case, but if that is the result then I find it agreeable. I agree it does sound strange now that I reread it. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 04:00, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - "There is no information on any of these actors in the article" - Except there is. Absent their own page, a redirect is perfectly fine as they are associated as actors in the film. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  I'm sorry, that was hyperbolic when it shouldn't have been. Yes, it does have information on those three actors, specifically the names of the characters they played, and for two of them a mention that they were included in the cast of the film. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Appreciate it. Since it would not qualify under that criteria, are you going to withdraw the nomination at this point? --CNMall41 (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I did not intend to rely on that specific criterion, and I would like for other editors to weigh in with their own judgement. I also felt at the time that "virtually no information" included as little information as simply stating the name of a character an actor played, although I would again appreciate hearing from other editors about what is "virtually no information". IndigoManedWolf (talk) 04:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Hearing from other editors is fine. But, what is your contention for why it needs deleted if it would not qualify under the initial criteria you cited? Those reviewing would need to know why you feel it needs deleted (e.g., the specific guideline it violates). --CNMall41 (talk) 04:08, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I apologize, I know I owe you a proper response as you are the one who created the redirects but I'm not able to give one right now. I will try in the morning. For now I will say that (in addition to the criterion I listed) as a reader, the redirect for Nicholas Logan felt jarring, and I would think similarly of the other two. I did not nominate Lukas Jann since, unlike the others, it looked like this is arguably the work he is most known for. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 04:43, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Also, you did not say "virtually no information" in your nonimation, you stated "no information." Just pointing out the contradiction. If they qualify for standalone articles, then create them. We don't delete redirects just because a page has not yet been created. I am confused all around about the rationale of the nomination. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:10, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Square root of 25

• Square root of 25 → 5  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Square root of 16 → 4  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The purpose of redirects isn't to be a calculator. Readers shouldn't expect this redirect to exist, especially since Square root of 24 etc. do not. Other than the bare fact that 5 squared is 25, a reader directed to the article 5 finds no content having any specific relevance to 5 qua the square root of 25, only content consisting of miscellaneous unrelated facts. Indeed a reader would find more information of actual relevance at 25 (number). See also the current RFD for Square root of 4 and Square root of 9. The redirects for square root of 16 and 25 were newly created. Adumbrativus (talk) 05:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Nuke from orbit...and people wonder why we cite WP:PANDORA 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Cheap and unambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  WP:CHEAP is not a reason for keeping...it's a counterargument against complaints about burdens on server resources, which no one has made. On the other hand, these are ambiguous, because while they could redirect to the value, they could just as reasonably redirect to Square root § Square roots of positive integers. And as I said in the other RFD, why stop here? Why not have Square root of 2209 -> 47 (number)? Why not 47-((2^2)*7) -> 19 (number)? Surely that's unambiguous and cheap, right? The search utility is not a calculator. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  These are not ambiguous, as the "square root of 25" is only ever "5." The same goes for "square root of 16" and "4." Anything else is mathmatically impossible and incorrect. I would have no objection to creating similar redirects for whole integers. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  But there's no encyclopedic information about "the square root of 16" at the "4" article, while the other article I mentioned has encyclopedic content about the overall concept of square roots of positive integers, so is a more appropriate encyclopedic target. And Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a calculator. To pretend otherwise is a misuse of the search feature.

  ... the "square root of 25" is only ever "5." The same goes for "square root of 16" and "4." Anything else is mathmatically impossible and incorrect.

  Not so, because nonzero numbers have two square roots. -4 is also a square root of 16, for example. In the biz, we say that 4 is the principal square root. All that being said, this is still pretty damned useless as a redirect. But anyway, between that and the ambiguity, it should be deleted. Would you support a bot run to make "Square root of n" redirects for every article on integers we have. If someone did it by hand, would you support keeping them all anyway? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

May 18

Flabbiness

• Flabbiness → Obesity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Flabby → wiktionary:flabby  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Either both should point to Wiktionary or both should point to an article. Note that there is also the concept of a flabby sheaf which we have content on. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:42, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on which target these should go to?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget flabbiness to Wiktionary per nom. The term can indicate fleshiness rather than obesity—a non-obese person can be flabby—and it can alternately mean weak or ineffective. Carguychris (talk) 20:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget Flabby to an article, most likely where Flabbiness targets. or weak delete both. I forgot the policy/essay, but it states that we should not be retargeting redirects to Wiktionary unless they have been repeatedly deleted and recreated, which these have not; one was created in 2006 and the other in 2007. Steel1943 (talk) 22:13, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

  FWIW, {{Wiktionary hatnote}}s are possible. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:45, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

  Struck out part of my stance, given the complications with the fact Flabby (wine) exists. Steel1943 (talk) 22:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:32, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• Note that just like flabby, flab has been a wiktionary redirect since 2017. But we also have Flabby (wine), and a singer who sang "Mambo Italiano". Jay 💬 15:05, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete I think Steel1943 is referring to the documentation at {{Wiktionary redirect}}. It's strict, laying out four criteria that need to be met. In my experience, these are frequently ignored, or one criterion is held to be good enough. I wish we wouldn't do that, or at least update the documentation to reflect actual practice.

The rub seems to be in the "Readers search for it on Wikipedia." How much? Most editors would probably agree that a single view isn't enough. "Flabbiness" doesn't meet this bar, with less than a view per day in the linked period; "flabby", with 40 views, still has a weak case IMO.

We could disambiguate Flabby, but it would be a weak one, pointing only to list entries. Flabbiness could go to the wine list entry, as the singer would not be referred to as such. I would prefer to delete both. --BDD (talk) 20:29, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment: The existence of Flabby (wine), mentioned by Jay, with no other titles of articles or redirects known as "Flabby" existing on Wikipedia means that per WP:PRECISE, deleting Flabby without also deleting Flabby (wine) is problematic. In other words, deletion of Flabby may not be an option that makes sense, and its alternative to deletion would have to be "retarget to where Flabby (wine) targets", which is currently Wine tasting descriptors#D–H. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Good point. Might be better to retarget both to Wine tasting descriptors#D–H, then. --BDD (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:17, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

1927-28 Waratahs tour of the Britain Isles, France and Canada

• 1927-28 Waratahs tour of the Britain Isles, France and Canada → 1927–28 New South Wales rugby union tour of the British Isles, France and Canada  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The error "Britain Isles" is implausible. This was created by a pagemove, but not a longstanding one — in 2008 someone moved the target to this title and then moved it one minute later, due to "Britain Isles". Nyttend (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Harmless redirect and from a misspelling Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. If it wasn't for Servite et contribuere's keep recommendation, this would have been eligible for G6 speedy deletion due to being obviously created in error. Thryduulf (talk) 17:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

1957-58 Australia rugby union tour of the Britain Isles, Ireland and France

• 1957-58 Australia rugby union tour of the Britain Isles, Ireland and France → 1957–58 Australia rugby union tour of Britain, Ireland and France  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The error "Britain Isles" is implausible. This was created by a pagemove, but not a longstanding one — in 2009 someone moved 1957-58 Australia rugby union tour of Britain, Ireland and France to this title, and it was reverted just two days later. Nyttend (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep From a misspelling Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep, someone could accidentally and mindlessly type "Isles", it is not very implausible. Easternsahara (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Obviously created in error but ineligible for speedy deletion due to the above keep recommendation. Thryduulf (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Goa, Daman and Diu (India)

• Goa, Daman and Diu (India) → Goa, Daman and Diu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. An old (2009) but completely unneeded redirect. "Goa, Daman and Diu" was an Indian union territory named for its three component regions; obviously there's nowhere else in the world with this name, so nobody would need to disambiguate it. And there's no naming convention whereby Indian states/territories use (India) in existing titles — you wouldn't encounter Uttar Pradesh (India) or Lakshadweep (India), and Sikkim (India) is a redirect — so nobody would see other state/territory articles using (India) and anticipate that this one would have it as a matter of course. Nyttend (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as a harmless {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. Thryduulf (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  Keep as above. Easternsahara (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Doktors

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

This redirect, supposedly from a drug trade name, has no mention at the target. Doktor isn't a suitable target. Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:14, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Create account

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

Yes symbol

• Yes symbol → Check mark  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Please create an article on the green circle that is the reverse of the No symbol. The Check mark article says nothing about the green circle. Georgia guy (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. RFD is not the place to request articles be created in place of redirects. That being said, meh, the current target does talk about the checkmark as a symbol indicating "yes", as well as variants outside the Anglosphere. Maybe it would be reasonable to split that part out, but I see nothing obvious or standard about a green circle instead. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
  • Commnet. Look at the article No symbol. I was once told that the "Yes symbol" that corresponds to the No symbol is a green circle with no diagonal line. Georgia guy (talk) 10:37, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep Per IP. And the Check Mark is also used to indicate "Yes". Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. If you want a page to have its own article, then be bold and create it instead of bringing it here. It says this at the top of WP:RFD. I am bad at usernames (talk | contribs) 18:20, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Better than when it used to target the page No symbol for no reason. And a Google Image search for yes symbol returns a whole lot of check marks. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Homily to Popiełuszko

• Homily to Popiełuszko → Muslimgauze  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unclear what this is about and the target does not provide any further information about it either. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. I first assumed that this was a musical composition by this musician that simply wasn't mentioned in his article, but I don't see anything similar in his discography article either. Nyttend (talk) 21:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete briefly mentioned at Jerzy_Popiełuszko#Legacy, but I don't think that'd be a good target and we don't have an article on the album it's on. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 18:35, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Mega Man II

• Mega Man II → Mega Man II (1991 video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

We should have consensus on the target of this redirect (or if it should be converted into a dab). From a contested technical request to move the article on the 1991 video game to the base page name (permalink):

Pointless disambiguator, despite its Roman numeral title being clearly distinguishable from the original NES game. MimirIsSmart (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

• @MimirIsSmart, weirdly enough, I think the redirect should go to WP:RFD—not for deletion, but for consensus on its target. Seems to have been the victim of a cut-and-paste move that was subsequently fixed—so an argument exists that Mega Man 2 should be the target as a de facto {{R from move}}; this is reflected by several retargets in the page history. I also wouldn't be surprised if there is consensus that WP:SMALLDETAILS doesn't apply and to create a disambiguation page instead. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

  The disambiguator is far from pointless. A casual reader seeing "Mega Man II" will think it's talking about the NES game that is 100x times as famous. Classic case where SMALLDETAILS doesn't work well. SnowFire (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

(above comments copied from technical move requests) Courtesy pinging @MimirIsSmart and SnowFire. Cheers, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 07:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Mega Man 2 says that it was styled "Mega Man II" but the box art pictured very clearly shows it using the Arabic numeral. Google hits for "Mega Man II" -Wikipedia show the 1991 Game Boy game as the most common use (of those where I can easily determine which is being referred to in the snippet) but not to the exclusion of results about the 1988 NES game. Searching fot "Mega Man 2" -Wikipedia is essentially the same in reverse: the NES game is the most common use (of those where I can easily tell), with a greater but not complete dominance than the Game Bay game has for the Roman Numeral. In both cases there are several results I can't tell which is being referred to from just the snippet (I've not looked further at any). The only two valid options seem to be either primary disambiguation with both 2 and II redirecting to the same dab page, or having the articles at Mega Man 2 for the NES and Mega Man II for the Game Boy. Thryduulf (talk) 12:03, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• Oh, yeah, meant to mention earlier that I've notified Talk:Mega Man 2. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate, there being 4 Mega Man TWO games, all of them should be disambiguated, and the base terms point to a disambiguation page; the 3 games with articles, and the mobile game listed at List of Mega Man video games; and the other numbered Mega Man should also be so done. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate or approve the move suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:09, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate The NES one is undoubtedly the most famous, and we shouldn't assume readers want to see the Game Boy one when they type this. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:30, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Karmelo Anthony

• Karmelo Anthony → Killing of Austin Metcalf  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Requesting deletion. Title subject is a teen charged with (but not yet tried for, much less convicted of) murder. The name is kept out of the body of the target page following discussion, due to WP:BLPCRIME reasons (the discussion was split, reaching a WP:NOCONSENSUS closure that kept the name out of the article.) This redirect is being used to put a name we're excluding right at the top of the article; the person redirected there will not find the text explaining what this name has to do with the subject. Nat Gertler (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep (copying and pasting my comment from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karmelo Anthony (2nd nomination), which is happening concurrently with this RfD...): The previous redirect discussion (Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 18 § Karmelo Anthony) was closed with If the discussion there results in a consensus to exclude the subject's name, this redirect should then be deleted. The RfC found "no consensus to include the name of the suspect and no consensus to exclude it". Also see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Please delete redirect, where the closing admin said the inclusion or non-inclusion of the redirect or, indeed the determination of what constituted the stable version of the article, is outside the scope of the RfC.
  All that background information aside, the redirect should be kept, because as I said at the previous RfD, readers who type "Karmelo Anthony" in the search bar already know his name; they are just looking for information about his case and the incident he was involved in (in which he is a central figure), and the redirect assists readers with that. Besides, his name appears at least 20 times in the References section, so deleting this redirect would not be helpful or beneficial to our readers in any way. Some1 (talk) 15:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  Because it disambiguates with Carmelo Anthony, this redirect is putting the name at the top, before the article, which is different than buried down in the references. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  The hatnote and the redirect are both separate issues. The hatnote can be removed from the article while still keeping the redirect. Some1 (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  They are not separate issues, they are linked; as long as we keep this redirect, folks will hold that we need the hatnote because people may be looking for Carmelo. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  If we keep this redirect, editors can always start an RfC and ask if there should be a hatnote or not. Some1 (talk) 16:10, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

As the closer of the previous RfD, I can confirm that speedy deletion would not have been authorized by my closure. I specifically authorized speedy deletion in the event of a consensus to exclude and there was no such consensus. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:11, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete The procedural history here is a ridiculous tangle (I'm inclined to agree that no speedy deletion is warranted), but on the merits its not mentioned at the target and hence the redirect is inappropriate. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• No real good answer. The name is a plausible search term. But redirecting it to an article that does not have it mentioned (per the lack of consensus to include, thus default to exclusion per BLP) will lead to only one conclusion for readers - that the name that was redirected was the name of the accused. And what Some1 doesn't consider above is if someone gets a link from a friend to this redirect, not having any idea who it is. They will come to the only one possible conclusion as well. So it really should ideally not be redirecting to this page. I would be okay (but not happy) about IAR ignoring the "mentioned at target" for this case since it is a plausible search term.. but only if there's a consensus to ignore the concerns about "naming by proxy" when there is no consensus to include the accused's name.
  On the other hand, redirecting it to Carmelo Anthony isn't super great either because then someone looking for the current target article would be sent to a basketball player that they don't have any interest in. So I guess that my !vote here would be to just delete it? If people want to get to the basketball player, they can spell the name right - not to mention that the Wikipedia search bar is not that bad that if they type in the name spelled with a K and it's a redlink, it'll almost certainly show them the basketball player they're looking for. That leaves the issue of people looking for this article and not finding it - to which there is no good answer that I see. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 18:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  If Friend A sends Friends B this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karmelo_Anthony (which, if the redirect is kept, unlikely since it redirects to Killing of Austin Metcalf and they would have to manually click the link to get to the non-redirect page), (and if the redirect is kept) it means that Friend A already knows who Karmelo Anthony is and it is likely they'll tell Friend B who that person is before sending them the link (e.g. "Did you hear about Karmelo Anthony? Here's a link to the Wikipedia article where you can read more about what's happening to him", etc.). I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Some1 (talk) 19:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not sure either - hence why I bolded "no real good answer" and was wishy over !voting to delete it. I've thought about how to respond to your point, which is correct/true, but the difference is we can't control what happens outside of Wikipedia, we can just control whether we further it or not. Our BLP policies are intentionally significantly more strict than even most news organizations have. I'd be surprised if most people were sending links through messaging apps/texts/etc and were including a whole backstory other than a short backstory, if even that. But then again, below it was pointed out that it's getting 4000 hits a month... And that's why I'm very weakly leaning towards deleting it. Sorry if my flipflopping/wishy-washy views aren't that helpful to others. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:50, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Not just a plausible search term, but has in fact received 4000 hits over the past month. There is no consensus that a BLP violation is involved. The hatnote is a different issue, and need not affect this discussion. StAnselm (talk) 21:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete - Delete name of person who was arrested when they were a minor, and has not been tried nor convicted. Gerson Fuentes had his name suppressed until after he was convicted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Note to closer: I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karmelo Anthony (2nd nomination) as a procedural close, which has already had some participation regarding the existence of this redirect. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 23:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - It's a frequently used search term and as a result, not having it will just result in someone searching elsewhere and getting less balanced content. I don't see anything new from the previous discussion about the WP:BLP aspect in the last few days and procedurally, keeping the redirect while not having the name in the article is, I believe, consistent with those closes. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 00:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete It's not mentioned in the target article. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 10:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per my !vote at the AFD. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 13:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete because this should have never been recreated per WP:BLPUNDEL, and per my comment in the AFD. Also noting that per WP:BLPUNDEL and WP:BIODEL no consensus defaults to removal. Symphony Regalia (talk) 21:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, Pppery, and Symphony. The WP:BURDEN of consensus for inclusion has not been met. JFHJr (㊟) 21:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Ironically, despite the exclusion the subject is still mentioned 21 times (by my count) at the target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Xe/xem

• Xe/xem → Neopronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Xe (pronoun) → Neopronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Xem → Neopronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Xemself → Neopronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Gender neutrality in languages with gendered third-person pronouns § Table of standard and non-standard third-person singular pronouns, where they are mentioned and linked to Wiktionary. Note: the mention was removed by XeCyranium. LIrala (talk) 01:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - Its hard to say, but if I was a reader who didn't know what they meant, I think the current target of neopronouns better helps the reader understand what they are than that busy chart... Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate "xem" there being multiple topics. Kembayan language (ISO 639 code "xem"), Marvel Comics' "Xem", XEM-TV former name of XHBC-TDT, the doctrine of 'Xem' in the Temple of Set, Little Games (album code "XEM") -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguate per IP. -Samoht27 (talk) 19:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Presumably only Xem is suitable for disambiguation. What should happen with the others? (Also, what is an album code? I don't think that's suitable for inclusion on a potential disambiguation page, but we can sort that out later.) --BDD (talk) 15:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per BDD's question.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Vatican Press

• Vatican Press → Dicastery for Communication  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No related article mentioned for "Vatican Press". Absolutiva (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The target article absolutely mentions that the Dicastery for Communication runs the Vatican Press. The Dicastery also runs (and the article also mentions and links to) all of the other possible organisations which might be intended by someone searching "Vatican Press", such as Holy See Press Office, Vatican Publishing House, and Vatican News Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 09:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

  Is there page translation from Italian to English Wikipedia article, or just draftify. Absolutiva (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguate Could also refer to Vatican News possibly Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:22, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Judging by the target article, there is an entity called Vatican Press under the aegis of the Dicastery, so this is a fine {{R from subtopic}}. Could it be confused with similarly named entities? Sure, but they seem to be mentioned in the same article anyway. And there needs to be some consideration for proper names, e.g., there are other national broadcasting companies, but National Broadcasting Company still redirects to NBC. If the Vatican Press gets its own article at some point, we can deal with any confusion via hatnotes or other usual devices. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Wubwubwub and Wub wub wub

• Wubwubwub → Helmholtz resonance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wub wub wub → Dubstep  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Inconsistency in redirects. The term "wub" is mentioned on the Dubstep page, while "Wub wub wub" appears in the title of an external link on the Helmholtz resonance page. Do note that a Wiktionary entry for "wub" exists as well. -insert valid name here- (talk) 02:05, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep the dubstep one, it's a common association to the genre, per the content at Dubstep#Wobble bass. I don't really know enough about "Helmholtz resonance" to comment, though it strikes me as less likely to be typing all of the "wubs" out as one long "word". Sergecross73 msg me 15:33, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate. Of note, "wub-wub-wub" appears in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. BD2412 T 18:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:13, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Helmholtz resonance for both. It includes the string of three "wub"s (although spaced), whilst the dubstep article doesn't. Nyttend (talk) 22:00, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

2023 Sudan sever crisis

• 2023 Sudan sever crisis → Sudanese civil war (2023–present)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as implausible redirect. 9ninety (talk) 13:25, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Are they severing what now? Borgenland (talk) 13:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete Server usually means internet or something to do with Digital Technology. Not a war Servite et contribuere (talk) 14:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

@Servite et contribuere this redirect has the word "sever" not "server". Thryduulf (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Thryduulf Oops. That was a misreading Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete implausible. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 14:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete searching "Sudan sever" brings up this redirect, a lot of hits for Bahrain and Sudan severing diplomatic relations with Iran (that event was in 2016 so definitely not relevant here), a single typo for "severe" and a single result for the National Association of Seadogs urging the (presumably) Nigerian federal government to sever ties with the Sudanese government in 2009. Thryduulf (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Judge Bridlegoose

• Judge Bridlegoose → Pantagruel (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Enwiki has no mention at all of "Judge Bridlegoose". The current target is not suitable, even if the current proposed deletion is declined. Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Data structure (blockchain)

• Data structure (blockchain) → Blockchain#Openness  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A participant in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Data structure (disambiguation) has suggested this should be deleted (it should no be moved: the redlink Blockchain (data structure) can be created as required). Pinging @Preimage: if they have anything else to add. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete This is a specific example of a data structure, not a completely separate use of the word "data structure" * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

"Ausf. A"

• "Ausf. A" → Panzer I variants  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per WP:UNNATURAL, no need for the title to be in quotes. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 12:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Ausf. A is not listed in quotes anywhere in Panzer_I_variants, nor are Ausf. B, etc. No need for redirect title to be enclosed in quotation marks. I hope there aren't other "Ausf. n" redirects for n = {B, C, F}! --FeralOink (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Dry humping

• Dry humping → Non-penetrative sex#Frottage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

that is NOT what dry humping means dry humping basically means simulating sex without actually having sex (usually this means with your clothes on). frottage is STILL sex User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Dry humping should NOT be a redirect to frottage. It either deserves its own article or better yet, be a redirect to heavy petting. Ooops, sorry, I see that heavy petting is already a redirect to making out. A subsection of Making out could include dry humping, with the (correct) description given by User:Someone-123-321 above, i.e. that it is NOT an act of either sexual penetration nor penetration of any other sort, because the parties involved keep their clothing on.--FeralOink (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I just noticed the header above, prior to saving. It states, "If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, you do not need to list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged."

Although dry humping is already listed here as a redirect, I hope it is not too late for me to turn it into an article. I will try working on that now.--FeralOink (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Speedy keep As mentioned by the nom, redirect should be kept until an article is created. मल्ल (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Adhab

• Adhab → Upsilon Andromedae  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target, wasn't mentioned when the redirect was created. The word appears in a few articles so retargeting or disambiguating might be a possibility. SevenSpheres (talk) 23:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, as best as I can tell, this is just (a rendering of) an Arabic word that can either be a name or is part of a couple other phrases, but there's nothing about this specifically. One of those search results seemed to be a typo for "Ahdab", which I fixed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:58, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Ramuh

• Ramuh → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Summoning Magic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ramuh (Final Fantasy) → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Summoning Magic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. On-wiki search does return a bunch of mentions in articles related to Final Fantasy, though whether this should be retargeted (and if yes, to which of the articles) should probably be left to someone familiar with the franchise. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:38, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Comment: The articles that mention "Ramuh" which are not associated with Final Fantasy are Adaptations of Little Red Riding Hood and Disco Fries. Steel1943 (talk) 01:12, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget, and if so where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Or disambiguate? Also, thoughts on the pre-redirect history in case of support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• delete. the current target doesn't mention ramuh (or name any summons for that matter, which i guess makes sense), the other articles only mention the name in passing, and most results i got were top however many summon lists and guides, so he's probably not on the notable side of summons consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 19:03, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See above comments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

There's been a murder

• There's been a murder → Taggart  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

When I search this phrase, mostly what comes up is a card game and a Jay-Z song. I'll admit, my searches from the US might not come up with Taggart due to it being a Scottish show, but I still think this is far from unambiguous. I added {{R from quote}} if it is kept though. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment My searches from the UK are a roughly equal mix of Taggart and the card game, with Jay-Z not getting a single hit on the first four pages (I stopped looking at that point). We have no content about the card game that I've found, but there is an EP and a TV episode with this title, both references to Taggart (The Gresham Flyers#Extended plays, Dear Green Place#Season 1). Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Imam Reza

• Imam Reza → Ali al-Rida  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's unclear why this redirects to Ali al-Rida. The word "Reza" appears twice in the entire article and it is unclear who it refers to. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 21:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Probably another name of the subject, which is made clearer at Imam Reza shrine. The redirect earlier targeted Ali al-Raza which was the earlier title of the target. Similar redirects exist like:
  • Imamreza
  • Imam Musa Reza
  • Imam raza
  • Imam Riza
  • Imam ali al-raza
  • Imam ali al-riza
  • Imam ali al-reza
• Jay 💬 11:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia

• Welcome to Wikipedia → Help:Getting started  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 15 § Welcome to Wikipedia – retarget to Wikipedia:Welcome

Cross-namespace redirect; very low view counts. MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:55, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep I'm often skeptical of cross-namespace redirects, but this one seems harmless and natural enough. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:49, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Per Pppery Servite et contribuere (talk) 21:41, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep; helpful. J947 ‡ ^edits 22:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. The problem with cross-namespace redirects is generally that they're confusing (you want an article but reach a project page), especially for people who wanted something unrelated to a Wikipedia project page, but if you enter this page, you're obviously wanting something about Wikipedia itself, and you get exactly what you asked for. Nyttend (talk) 03:33, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per all above. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 15#Welcome to Wikipedia closed with a consensus to retarget this from Wikipedia:Introduction (now Help:Introduction) to Wikipedia:Welcome, which is now a redirect to Help:Getting started. Thryduulf (talk) 17:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Northern Districts

• Northern Districts → Northern Districts men's cricket team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also refer to the Women's team or a team in Adelaide. Also not to be confused with the Northern District Cricket Club that plays at Mark Taylor Oval in Waitara, New South Wales. I am thinking to Dabify. Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:44, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Rename the existing disambiguation page at Northern Districts cricket team to Northern Districts, and chuck in a few links to Northern Districts Cricket Club, The Richmond River Herald and Northern Districts Advertiser, and Northern District (disambiguation). J947 ‡ ^edits 22:37, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Do what J947 recommends and link the Northern District and Northern Districts dab pages with see-also entries. I thought about merging the dab page, but there isn't any overlap between them. Thryduulf (talk) 17:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Southern Districts

• Southern Districts → Southern Districts Football Club  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous and almost certainly not primary topic. Could refer to places or sports teams. Probably best to Dabify. Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete unless someone can suggest names to put on a disambiguation page. (No objection if someone converts it during this discussion.) One would expect a page with this title to be a disambiguation page or an article about a geographic location, not a redirect to a sport club. Nyttend (talk) 22:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  Nyttend, Here are the sports Southern Districts Football Club (Existing redirect), Southern Districts Rugby Club, Southern Districts Raiders, Southern Districts Cricket Club, Southern Districts women's cricket team, Southern Districts Gridiron Club. And to a lesser extent: United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate between the names listed here, with a see also link to Southern District (disambiguation). J947 ‡ ^edits 22:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate, since there are sufficient article to put on a disambiguation page. Nyttend (talk) 03:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Eurovision

• Eurovision → Eurovision Song Contest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Honestly, i'm confused at Eurovision (disambiguation) article which implies a network that organise the contest (Eurovision (network), founded in 1954) is in the first place on the list, instead of contest itself that first held in 1956, despite "Eurovision" redirects to ESC instead of the network. My question is, should we keep "Eurovision" as a redirect for "Eurovision Song Contest" on condition that the DAB page needs to be restructured, or retarget "Eurovision" to a network that holds the contest? 103.111.102.118 (talk) 02:46, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep Per WP:PrimaryTopic. Also going to change the DAB page and put the notify on the redirect. Going to have to do some programming to notify it on redirect entry. Definitely going to notify a bunch of Projects about this discussion. Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as primary topic per Servite. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 10:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Clear primary topic. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per above. J947 ‡ ^edits 22:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Very, very clearly the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Enix150 (talk) 19:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• WP:SNOW keep 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:B662:2580:6D8:1946 (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

MAHA

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

Recently, reliable sources have most commonly used MAHA (specifically in all capitals) to refer to Make America Healthy Again, although it has also been commonly used for Microangiopathic hemolytic anemia before that saying was a thing. Personally, I think MAHA should redirect to Make America Healthy Again, but if it doesn't it should simply continue redirecting to Maha. GrandDuchyConti 💜(talk) 02:26, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Make America Healthy Again "MAHA" (in all-caps) is clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this case, so retargeting "MAHA" to "Make America Healthy Again" makes sense. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. From PTOPIC, this would seem to be an instance of

  In a few cases, there is some conflict between a topic of primary usage (Apple Inc.) and one of primary long-term significance (Apple). In such a case, consensus may be useful in determining which topic, if any, is the primary topic.

  such a conflict. And my inclination is to avoid the urge to decide primariness merely because something is in the news right now, and think about if anyone's going to remember this in 10 or 20 years, which I'm doubtful of. That being said, the dab page is probably just safest. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Plenty of meanings, and a potentially short-lived usage isn't enough to overcome established usage for other meanings. (Consider how many Google Books results will refer to the proposed retarget.) If it were just the two alternate options mentioned by the nominator, I'd advise the medical topic, because it too has long-term usage, whilst the political topic may well be soon forgotten except as historical trivia. Nyttend (talk) 22:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a very US-centric view - that because in the US MAHA is being used as a political slogan it must be the primary topic. The difference with Maga (for which MAGA redirects to the Make America Great Again page) is that there are very few other topics, and it is used worldwide and has impact on other countries as well. Even if the "MAHA movement" ends up making changes that are significant, it is virtually certainly going to be contained within the US and within this administration. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Per Berchanhimez Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:32, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per berchanhimez. It may be that the political slogan becomes the primary topic in the future, but that's WP:CRYSTAL. If it does we can revisit the target of this redirect at that point, but what matters now is that it currently is not the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 17:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

New pope

• New pope → Pope Leo XIV  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• New president → Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 December 27 § New pope – Retarget to papal conclave

This redirect has pointed to Pope Benedict XVI and papal conclave at various points. I pointed it to The New Pope earlier this year and think that that is the more intuitive target; pointing it to the new pope after every conclave doesn't seem sustainable (when does a new pope lose his newness?). The old RfD was before the TV show was released. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Both The New Pope and Papal Conclave are plausible targets, so if this points to one of them there should be a hatnote to the other. Thryduulf (talk) 01:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• I've also added new president, which is far too broad to target just the American one. There are also apolitical presidents, such as corporate presidents, so retargeting to List of current heads of state and government isn't viable either; I think that it should be deleted. Before someone asks, this is not an invitation to create New American president, which I don't think would be useful to readers (again, when does a president lose their newness?). Sdrqaz (talk) 01:20, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Change target to The New Pope for New pope. Probably best match and a possible confused title. Delete New president it is silly, might not be NPOV, there are Presidents all over the world, and it is not common at all. Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Leo won't be a "new pope" forever, likewise for Trump and "new president" (plus the fact there are many other presidents around the world, not just the US one). Retarget New pope to The New Pope, delete New president. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 10:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget New pope to The New Pope, delete New president per above. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:05, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete New president as hopelessly vague; president of what? where?. Retarget new pope back to papal conclave (and keep it there forever regardless of any future conclaves) as I'm not convinced both omitting the "the" and lowercasing make an especially plausible search term for the series, and that target avoids any concerns about arbitrariness of the word "new" * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to papal conclave and presidential election. Most people searching for "new pope" are likely to be interested in the office covered by Pope and how one comes to become a new occupant, not a very short-lived TV series, and the papal conclave article discusses the subject. Similar thing for "new president" and the corresponding process, which is covered by presidential election. Both have alternate meanings, e.g. Coptic Pope of Alexandria and the corporate presidents referenced above, but the Catholic pope and the political presidents have dominant usage in English. Nyttend (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete New president as hopelessly vague. Even Presidential election is too narrow a topic, as there are all kinds of presidents who are not chosen in presidential elections (for instance, presidents of companies, government systems where the president is appointed rather than elected, and government systems where an individual is president by virtue of being elected to some other office). Retarget New pope to one of the targets suggested above. I think The New Pope is the best match for this search term, but either way, whichever target is chosen should get a hatnote to the other target. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Mx. Granger, as far as politicians are concerned, what presidents are not elected? Off the top of my head, I can think of only one non-elected office that was functionally a president — German Emperor, which was held by the King of Prussia ex officio — and even presidencies that are functionally hereditary, like the President of the United Arab Emirates or the President of North Korea (when it was held by a living person), are typically elected, at least as a formality. Nyttend (talk) 03:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Some presidents, such as the president of China, are appointed by a legislature (I guess you could call the vote within the legislature on who to appoint a "presidential election" – I haven't heard it called that, but I now see that it's listed at Presidential election). In other cases, such as the president of the North Dakota Senate, an individual is elected to some other position (in this case, Lieutenant Governor of North Dakota) and becomes president by virtue of that role. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 04:03, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

"Appointed" sounds like the incumbent is chosen by an individual or tiny group; it's an election by the legislature. As far as ex officio, I was thinking of head-of-state presidents and didn't think of presidents of legislatures. Nyttend (talk) 00:29, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Shish

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

The lowercase makes the target surprising. Since there isn't much information on shish at skewer (the article is too broad), I think that retargeting to shish kebab (page view comparison) would provide the most information and be the most intuitive for readers. Alternatives include swapping with Shish (disambiguation). Sdrqaz (talk) 00:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 17

Main Article

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

Could also refer to {{Main}} (which produces a "main article" hatnote); google search also gives me a bunch of random unrelated stuff too Duckmather (talk) 02:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

This is an unconvincing nomination (mainspace titles aren't ambiguous with templates), but then the redirect's existence is itself unconvincing (I don't see this as a plausible search term for the main page). Weak delete I guess. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't think your claim that mainspace titles aren't ambiguous with templates is quite correct, though. For example, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 12#Multiple issues ended in deletion. Nevertheless the phrase "multiple issues" is still a highly enwiki-specific phrase, and I would guess that {{multiple issues}} is the main way many, if not most, ordinary people would ever see that phrase in the wild. Duckmather (talk) 19:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Remove redirect and Draftify I don't see why an article can't be created Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Main Article as sensible. Do not keep MAIN ARTICLE, as it is implausible, probably a joke, and will likely get G7 anyway. Oreocooke (talk) 04:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

@Oreocooke you are the creator of MAIN ARTICLE, is this a request for it to be deleted? Thryduulf (talk) 12:27, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

not exactly. Oreocooke (talk) 18:33, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Deleted MAIN ARTICLE by G7 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

I technically didn't request yet but I was going to anyway so it isn't really a problem Oreocooke (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete not sensible. The Main Page is not an article, it is not the main article about Wikipedia either, which is Wikipedia. It is not the main article about articles. article (disambiguation) shows several possible base topics. Nor is it the main article about main. Main (disambiguation) shows many articles about Main -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:54, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

  idea: disambiguate Oreocooke (talk) 18:37, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

  idea: convert to disambiguation or retarget to Main Oreocooke (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as a plausible term to a newbie for the Main Page (or Main page in the Main menu), where a prominent link to Wikipedia can also be found (Note: I guess you just have to know the main menu is ... there, somewhere, now in the menu button. Fun fact, when I first started on this site, I was oblivious to the main page even though the main menu was once visible.) But we don't have things like Taylor Swift article or Taylor Swift page, nor should we—the Main page/article needs to be disambiguated from Main. As for {{Main}}, Edit article was created as a way to get to the Wikipedia space instructions for how to edit articles, but was subsequently moved by the redirect's creator to Editing, which seems like an afterthought to me, but at least there is a hatnote for Help:Editing. Havradim leaf a message 14:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as confusing and not very useful. What newbie is going to search for "Main Article" instead of just clicking the logo to get to the main page? Very few websites call their homepage the "Main Article". Can you imagine anyone typing "Main Article" into the search box of, say, the BBC's website to get to their homepage? I can't. Not only that, this redirect is confusing, because when Wikipedia editors say "main article" they usually don't mean the main page, but rather an article whose scope is broader than some other article being discussed. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

El mahdi Mohammad Senosi

• El mahdi Mohammad Senosi → Mohammed El Senussi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure whether this is a plausible name. This is a {{redirect with history}} however as it used to be a content fork (???), even though the history doesn't seem to have gotten into any other pages as far as I know. Duckmather (talk) 02:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Romantic and gender minorities

• Gender minority → Gender identity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Romantic minorities → Romantic orientation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Romantic minority → Romantic orientation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Sexual minority, which is about to be moved to include gender as a result of a copyedit/merge of LGBTQ (term)#SGM/GSM/GSRM. Gender minority may also be ambiguous with Gender diverse (redirects to gender nonconformity) and Gender diversity. Hatnote may apply? LIrala (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Sexual and gender minorities now that the move is complete.--Trystan (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Turn to article (for Gender minority) Gender minority can include intersex people. Sharouser (talk) 02:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further opinions on Gender minority?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:09, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

I think it makes the most sense to retarget gender minority to the parent topic of sexual and gender minorities for now. If that article is improved and expanded to the point that gender minority should be spun off, that can happen organically.--Trystan (talk) 18:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Sexual and gender minorities per Trystan. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Sexual and gender minorities. NutmegCoffeeTea (she/her) (talk) 13:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Dr. Dr.

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

I think it is more likely that searchers are looking for a double doctorate described at Doctor (title) than they are any of the other entries at the disambiguation page Doctor Doctor. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom and add a hatnote back to the disambiguation page. There are presently non-notable artists and songs by this title, if they become notable in future this can be reevaluated at that time. Thryduulf (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

The Doctors (series 1)

• The Doctors (series 1) → List of Medics (Polish TV series) episodes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is ambiguous and should be deleted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Doctor#Series as a {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Thryduulf (talk) 19:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Sir richard

• Sir richard → Richard Francis Burton  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Names always start with capital letters, and not sure why it redirects here. There are many men with a Knighthood named Richard. I am thinking either a retarget to Richard, another similar page, or just delete. Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Richard or Disambiguate at Sir Rirchard and retarget this there. Searching in all lowercase is very plausible so I don't support deletion when there are useful targets. Thryduulf (talk) 19:34, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Richard I would prefer not to create a separate DAB page for people who've been knighted, which could become a bit of a pandora's box. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Master/slave relationship

• Master/slave relationship → Master/slave (BDSM)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

admittedly a weak nom, but there IS also technically a "relationship" in regular, non-kinky slavery as well, as relationship simply means "a way in which two or more people behave and are involved with each other" (definition grabbed from wikipedia) so uhh that's a possible problem.

weak, because the kink seems to be a way more common meaning for "master/slave relationship" but still worthy enough of a hatnote. this is only in RfD because i still have no idea if this is even a likely enough ambiguation TO need a hatnote in the first place User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 13:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to the dab Master–slave; all uses of that term involve or could reasonably be said to invoolve a relationship. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per Pppery. I've heard this exact phrase being used in the context of computer networking. Thryduulf (talk) 19:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per Pppery. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per above. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:20, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per Pppery. Enix150 (talk) 19:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Sir Thomas

• Sir Thomas → Sir Thomas (horse)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Almost certainly not the WP:Primary topic. There are men named Thomas who have been given a Knighthood. think a redirect to either I Thomas or Thomas (name) would be appropriate. Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of people with given name Thomas, which is where the people named Sir Thomas are listed, and add a hatnote to the horse. Thryduulf (talk) 11:25, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retagret per Thryduulf. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retagret per Thryduulf. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:29, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

"Union of England, Scotland and Ireland"

• "Union of England, Scotland and Ireland" → Union of the Crowns  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. There's no need for the quotation marks, which make this rather implausible. Nyttend (talk) 09:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

He Hillston Spectator and Mount Hope, Willanthry, Cudgellico, Booligal, Euabalong, Ivanhoe, Mossgiel, Gunbar and Lachlan River Advertiser

• He Hillston Spectator and Mount Hope, Willanthry, Cudgellico, Booligal, Euabalong, Ivanhoe, Mossgiel, Gunbar and Lachlan River Advertiser → Hillston-Ivanhoe Spectator  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Delete. Typo upon creation; this was meant to begin with "The", rather than "he". Never an article title, not likely to have been linked, and not plausible for searches. Nyttend (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete: We already have The Hillston Spectator and Mount Hope, Willanthry, Cudgellico, Booligal, Euabalong, Ivanhoe, Mossgiel, Gunbar and Lachlan River Advertiser. Furthermore, if someone does forget to type the T, they will probably find the intended article soon anyway. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 10:35, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hunting, Fishing and Animals in ancient egypt

• Hunting, Fishing and Animals in ancient egypt → Hunting, fishing and animals in ancient Egypt  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Target was created under this oddly capitalised title in 2015 and moved elsewhere just three days later. Not likely that many links were created to it in just those three days, and it's odd enough to be implausible as a search nowadays. Nyttend (talk) 07:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Same words with other capitalisation Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:04, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Hunting, Fishing and Animals in Ancient Egypt

• Hunting, Fishing and Animals in Ancient Egypt → Hunting, fishing and animals in ancient Egypt  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Target was moved to this overcapitalised title in 2015 and moved to the current target a couple of weeks later. Not likely that many links were created to it in those weeks, and it's odd enough to be implausible as a search nowadays. Nyttend (talk) 07:49, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nominator.

124.104.160.21 (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Same words with other capitalisation Servite et contribuere (talk) 10:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep: Harmless redirect, and some people might be accustomed to capitalized titles. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 10:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep harmless and highly plausible. Thryduulf (talk) 11:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Myung Jae-nam

• Myung Jae-nam → Hapkido#Myung Jae-Nam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mentioned of "Myung Jae-nam" at the target. Became a redirect as a result was redirect at AfD last 1 year. 124.104.160.21 (talk) 07:38, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to the correct section, Hapkido#Myung Jae-nam. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:22, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to correct section per Mx. Granger. Enix150 (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2014 Act (H.R. 4450; 113th Congress)

• Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2014 Act (H.R. 4450; 113th Congress) → Travel Promotion Act of 2009  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Unusually long, with unneeded disambiguation. In 2014, someone created an article about a law related to the 2009 act, using this title; it was later moved to cut the unneeded parenthetical disambiguation, and then retargeted to 2009 because the whole 2014 article was unneeded. No significant article history is present here, since it's functionally just the history of a redirect. Also note the error "Act of 2014 Act". Nyttend (talk) 06:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nominator Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:02, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2014 Act

• Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2014 Act → Travel Promotion Act of 2009  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Unusually long with error. This is a revised version of the disambiguated title nominated just above, but retaining the "Act of 2014 Act" error. The article was at this title for a few months in 2014-2015, but not long to be that significant, especially since it's just the history of a redirect, not the history of an existing article Nyttend (talk) 06:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Brace (hunting)

• Brace (hunting) → 2#In other fields  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete: Specialized synonym no longer mentioned at target. (A previous version of the article "2" did mention it.) I don't see any good retargets. Glossary of hunting terms does not exist. Brace (sports) redirects to Hat-trick for a similar meaning (two goals), but there's no mention of hunting at Hat-trick (and I don't know whether it would be appropriate to add it). Four articles link to the redirect as a kind of gloss, but that's not ideal (have to hover or click the link to understand at all; no explanation of how the word-sense is and isn't used). Jruderman (talk) 05:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Like the nominator, I can't find a good place to retarget. It's also worth noting that my web search for "brace hunting" actually brought up more results for bow bracers than the plural definition. I don't think that would be a good target, however, because it would be confusing for readers who might be looking for the plural definition. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Mouth Noise

• Mouth Noise → Burping  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The mouth makes many different noises, not sure why the current target is the target for this. Delete as ambiguous. Steel1943 (talk) 22:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. A google search shows that there is no PTOPIC. Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:06, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget. My google results are very different to Ca's in that there is a very clear primary topic - unwanted noises from the mouth during audio recording however we do not have any content about that under this title or the alternative name for it "vocal noise". Pop filters (also being hydrated and not smoking weed beforehand) are the recommended solution to getting rid of these noises, and while it doesn't use the term the second sentence means that people arriving there after using the term will understand the connection. Another possible target is Side Hustle#Season 1 (2020–21) Side Hustle#ep22, where "Mouth Noise" is the title of episode 22 (redirecting to the specific episode would be better than the season but they don't appear to have anchors). I think redirecting one with a hatnote to the other (in either direction) is preferable to a two-item dab. Burping is definitely the wrong target, indeed I would describe that as a throat sound rather than a mouth sound. Thryduulf (talk) 01:39, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

  @Thryduulf: I think you are looking to mention the possibility of retargeting this to Side Hustle#ep22? Steel1943 (talk) 05:30, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, I didn't spot that anchor existed, thanks. I'll tweak my above post. Thryduulf (talk) 10:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Side Hustle#ep22 per Thryduulf. Mouth Noises sounds like a new Neil Cicierega album... -insert valid name here- (talk) 16:20, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to the suggested episode per the others. It's the title of something we have content about, it's already capitalized, and the non-proper noun is just too vague to point to any particular target. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
• Weak retarget to Mouth#Other functions of the mouth, which mentions that Mouths are also used as part of the mechanism for producing sounds for communication (in a paragraph all about different ways animals use their mouths to create noises). If people want more content about how animal mouths create noises, that section could be expanded. Another possible target is Animal_communication#Auditory. The TV episode seems too surprising for such a broad and common topic. Duckmather (talk) 02:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete. There are oh so many things that can be called sound of the mouth, but there apparently is no established term (the most used meaning found by me on Google Scholar are apparently - in addition to already mentioned audio recording one - in the in the speech recognition, cf. "signal starts with mouth noise", communication signals unknown to the recipient ("Mouth noise: Tourist makes noise (whistle, kissing noises, shouts) ...") and in playing the wind instruments, "infantile, 'mouth-noise' source of his brass arrangement"). IMHO the only alternative to deletion is to make a random and thus useless WP:disambiguation to things like Breathing ("audible breathing or other kind of mouth noise"), Speech recognition, etc. For the avoidance of doubt, I do not like the disambiguation alternative. Викидим (talk) 05:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete Per comments of nominator Servite et contribuere (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Викидим. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• I don't understand why deletion is being preferred over redirecting to the content we have about something with this exact name and capitalisation? Thryduulf (talk) 19:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

2021 Lancaster, Pennsylvania mayoral election

• 2021 Lancaster, Pennsylvania mayoral election → List of mayors of Lancaster, Pennsylvania#Mayors of Lancaster  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The election is not discussed at the target, a list of mayors does not have info on the 2021 election Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 13:51, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment there have been two articles about this election, both deleted at AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Lancaster, Pennsylvania, mayoral election in 2022 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Lancaster, Pennsylvania mayoral election in 2023; the first title has a comma after Pennsylvania that the second (and this redirect) omits). As far as I can tell, the creation of this redirect in 2024 was in good faith and unrelated to either AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 00:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
• Comment I created this redirect due to it appearing in a most wanted list showing over 500 links to it. I think the source is a template: Template:Elections in Pennsylvania sidebar -Bogger (talk) 09:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete this was created in good faith, but given there is no information on this and it seems to be a requested link, a red link is fine here. If there is enough to write an article notability-wise, then an article should be written on it and if that's not the case (which might be the case given then AfDs) then information can be added to the article and the redirect recreated. Alternatively, it could be worth just removing this link from the template as it was a landslide election where only one major party ran a candidate so there might never be much useful information on it. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:39, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:05, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Publican

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

The Roman tax collector is not the primary topic, since it also has another (presumably more common) sense of "pub owner or manager". My suggestion is retarget to Publican (disambiguation), then potentially move that to Publican. Alternatively retarget to Pub if there's consensus that the "pub owner" sense is the clear primary topic. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 00:35, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. "Publican" is not that widely used to mean "tavern keeper" or "barkeeper", and I note that we don't even have an article about barkeepers: the term is a redirect to bartender, which is not the same thing. Also, the term seems to have arisen humorously, presumably by allusion to the Roman publicani. Evidently at one time there was also a trade publication by this title, but it is no more, and the number of readers searching for it is extremely small (average of two daily pageviews over the last ninety days). Apart from these, the only significant use that does not refer to Roman tax collectors is a synonym for the twelfth-century Arnoldists. So I think that the current target is the best choice; hatnotes should be sufficient to help users who are looking for some other use. P Aculeius (talk) 12:49, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment. The word "publican" is so uncommon I doubt either can convincingly be said to be the "common" usage. Moving to a neutral disambiguation page is unobjectionable. Ifly6 (talk) 20:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget and move as suggested by the nominator. There is not a clear primary topic here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:31, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose. The biblical meaning is 'tax collector', so I think the current target is fine. Srnec (talk) 20:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:01, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Question Where in the world does "publican" mean "landlord of a pub"? I've not encountered it in the US or Australia. Is this UK usage? Nyttend (talk) 06:23, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  In Britain, apparently, see [1] for an example. Retarget as proposed (to disambiguation), there is apparently WP:NOPRIMARY. Викидим (talk) 06:53, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Vikidim's book link treats this as specifically UK slang, whilst the current use exists worldwide. Nyttend (talk) 06:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  Publicani were well-known in Roman Empire, at a time it could have qualified as "worldwide", I guess. I also think that nowadays only a small minority of our readers knows about the Latin term (these people indeed are also dispersed worldwide), while everyone in GB must be aware of the existence of pubkeepers, and I would expect the latter type to be in majority here. For the avoidance of doubt, I am not from GB and knew about the Latin term prior to this discussion. Викидим (talk) 07:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  The English term 'publican', with the same meaning as the Latin, is found in the King James Bible. Srnec (talk) 02:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Alloromanticism

• Alloromanticism → Aromanticism#alloromanticism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Alloromantic → Aromanticism#alloromanticism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to romantic orientation? Skemous (talk) 18:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

In case this is retargeted, Alloromantic should be as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:49, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled Alloromantic with this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Weak retarget both to Romantic orientation#Romantic identities, where the word "alloromanticism" is mentioned (which also makes it clear that it's not purely defined in opposition to "aromanticism" as the current target might suggest). Duckmather (talk) 14:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Aromanticism as {{R from antonym}}. I think this is a difficult concept to describe except in reference to its opposite. I checked similar terms. Cisgender has its own article. Perisex redirects to Endosex (I was more familiar with the former term, but the latter seems to have been coined earlier.) Romantic orientation seems like a fine option too; I just think Aromanticism is more to the point. --BDD (talk) 20:33, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget to Romantic Orientation? Or to Aromanticism?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Alberta separatism and annexationism

• Alberta separatism and annexationism → Alberta separatism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete - Implausible search target; redirects to a shorter title; created from an inappropriate page move; NPOV violation. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 15:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The target is about movements both for independence (separatism) and annexation by the United States (annexationsim) so it's not misleading and doesn't seem implausible. The title length is irrelevant and I'm not understand why you claim this is an NPOV violation? Even it if is non-neutral, it's important to note that redirects do not have to be neutral. Thryduulf (talk) 16:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete on the basis, that the redirect was part of a unexplained move and the article is 97% not on annexationism compared to other articles, so agree largely implausible. Alberta annexationism would redirect readers to the more relevant article. DankJae 22:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. The redirect implies that the current target covers both topics, thus hiding the existence of the section to which Alberta annexationism currently redirects. Nyttend (talk) 07:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 16

Zig-Zag, Snakes and Ladders (a didactic fiction about cartography)(1980)

• Zig-Zag, Snakes and Ladders (a didactic fiction about cartography)(1980) → Snakes and Ladders (1980 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. For one thing, "(1980)" is unneeded, as no other films have this long title, so it's not very plausible. For another thing, the lack of space between the parentheses — it's cartography)(1980, not cartography) (1980) — makes it highly unlikely to be typed. This was the original title when the target was created in 2017, but it was moved to a different title within 24 hours of creation; I doubt there are much of any links to this original title. Nyttend (talk) 22:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete but only for the missing space. Unnecessary disambiguation is not a reason to delete, and I would recommend keeping if that were the only issue. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

the the

• The Fight for the the Standard → The Fight for the Standard  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Causes of poverty in the the United States → Theories_of_poverty#Causes_of_poverty_in_the_United_States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 12th Central Committee of the the League of Communists of Yugoslavia → Central Committee of the 12th Congress of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. All three of these titles use the string "the the"; they're the only ones on the project, aside from intentional uses like The The and Paris in the the Spring. #1 was the title of its target article upon creation last month, but it was moved one minute later; the other two were created as redirects longer ago. I can't see a good reason to include redirects with this error. Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Nyttend. Enix150 (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

To amend Public Law 93-435 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa (S. 256; 113th Congress)

• To amend Public Law 93-435 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa (S. 256; 113th Congress) → Public Law 113-34  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Egregiously long title. Nobody's going to enter the long title and then follow it up with (S. 256; 113th Congress); the long title is sufficiently unambiguous. Because this was bot-created as a redirect to an alternate form of the title (which I'm nominating separately), there's no reason to be concerned about deleting any history. Nyttend (talk) 21:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep accurate and unambiguous. Nothing in the nomination statement is a reason to delete a redirect that is harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

To amend Public Law 93–435 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa (S. 256; 113th Congress)

• To amend Public Law 93–435 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa (S. 256; 113th Congress) → Public Law 113-34  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Egregiously long title. Nobody's going to enter the long title and then follow it up with (S. 256; 113th Congress); the long title is sufficiently unambiguous. This was the target's title for eight months after its creation in September 2013, but I don't think that's a problem: (1) 2013 isn't ancient history for Wikipedia, unlike, say, 2003 or 2006; (2) External links to this title are unlikely, given its unwieldy length and the fact that pages are likely to have been updated to link its new name or its official designation; (3) All internal links to the target use the redirect for its official designation, S. 256 (113th Congress), so I doubt we'll find significant links to this long version in page histories. Nyttend (talk) 21:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep accurate and unambiguous. Nothing in the nomination statement is a reason to delete a redirect that is harmless. That it is a {{R from move}} strengthens the case for plausibility and thus for keeping. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

The Punjabis in British Columbia: Location, Labour, First Nation, and Multiculturalism

• The Punjabis in British Columbia: Location, Labour, First Nation, and Multiculturalism → The Punjabis in British Columbia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This is the title of a book, but the third element in the subtitle is First Nations (plural), not First Nation (singular). This was created as a redirect to the target, not via pagemove, so we don't need to worry about getting rid of any real history. I don't imagine anyone will search the full title-and-subtitle combination without copy/pasting, so people won't accidentally search for the Nation version; hence, this is implausible. Nyttend (talk) 20:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

The Murder of Eugene M. Newman by William V. Cleary in Haverstraw, New York, in 1914, with the Cleary Trial, and the New York State Investigation

• The Murder of Eugene M. Newman by William V. Cleary in Haverstraw, New York, in 1914, with the Cleary Trial, and the New York State Investigation → Cleary-Newman murder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Created in 2006, perhaps as the original name of the target article. The name is so absurdly long that I can't imagine it being useful for anything if it weren't so old. Plus, the early page history is confusing — first it's moved from The Cleary-Newman Murder Case (New York, 1914-1916) to Cleary-Newman murder case, then it's moved from this long title to Cleary-Newman murder, and finally from Cleary-Newman Murder Case to Cleary-Newman murder. I'm guessing that there are some history merges here (you can't move a page from A to B, and then from C to D, without moving it from B to C first), so I really don't know what the original title of the page is. For that reason, I don't see a good reason to retain this title for historical reasons (we don't know that it's the original name), we shouldn't expect someone to have linked the very long title when it existed (the pagemove happened barely 24 hours after the first edit in the target's history), and the idea of someone linking this redirect in the succeeding 19 years seems highly unlikely.

PS, when I run a Google search, I get zero results except Wikipedia. It's not as if this were the title of a book related to this murder. Nyttend (talk) 20:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

The names of all the greek gods, spirits, and heroes

• The names of all the greek gods, spirits, and heroes → List of Greek deities  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Created in 2009 as a content fork of the target, it should have been deleted, but instead it was redirected to the current target a couple of hours after creation. This has no significant edit history, nothing's been merged (WP:MAD), and its title is quite unlikely to be used. Between its creation date and today, it's been edited just once: a few months ago, it was retargeted to comply with a move of the target page. Nyttend (talk) 20:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, primarily because this redirect is no longer accurate: with the recent move, mentioned by the nominator (which was actually a split), the target page no longer covers heroes. In addition, we're not really covering all spirits (nymphs, for example, aren't listed individually). It also seems an unlikely search term to me, and nothing of any value would be lost from the page's history. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:14, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Jam doughnuts

• Draft:Jam doughnuts → Jelly doughnut  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I attempted nominating this for speedy deletion but it was declined. I do not feel it is necessary to have a redirect from the draft namespace, especially since the non-draft namespace version of this redirect exists and also redirects the same way. It is incredibly improbable someone would ever keyword the draft namespace to find information on a topic—the casual reader doesn’t even realize Wikipedia is more than article space. The draft was also originally created by a troll who was blocked indefinitely, before another user changed it into a redirect. Thebirdlover (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Ugh. Just delete this per WP:NOTBURO, WP:G6, or what have you. It was a duplicate created by a not-here user, and a redirect at the same title already exists in main space. And for some bizarre reason, you can't even let draft space redirects get cleaned up in six months by G13. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  Believe me, if I was an administrator I would, don't act like everyone on Wikipedia has those powers. Draft space redirects shouldn't exist in my opinion--why delay something that can be done now? --Thebirdlover (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  I was just addressing Wikipedia at large, not you specifically. I wasn't expecting you to do any of this, but rather the result of this discussion, which shouldn't really be necessary, but sometimes the bureaucracy wins out. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as completely harmless. This discussion has caused far more disruption and wasted far more editor time than anything else to do with this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  In what way does keeping it prevent further disruption and wasted time versus deleting it? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Misleading, in the implication that there was a real draft at this title that editors could draw from. --BDD (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Move without redirect to Jam doughnuts. I assume this editor was trying to create a redirect at this title but couldn't due to not being autoconfirmed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Leybach

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

Ambiguous term, no evidence that the current target is primary topic. It is after all the historic name for the Ljubljanica river. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep I was initially inclined to agree and recommend disambiguation, since the bar for a surname redirecting to an individual should be high, and the composer is not especially well known. However, there are only two topics involved, and looking beyond the two articles themselves, every current use refers to the composer. Thus, I recommend keeping and adding {{redirect|Leybach|the river|Ljubljanica}} as a hatnote on the composer's article. --BDD (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Office hours

• Office hours → Working time  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Office Hours → The Dandy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Could also refer to office hours in classes, or this random podcast Duckmather (talk) 02:16, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Note I've added Office Hours to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Business hours or refine to Working time#Workweek structure. I've also created a new disambiguation page at Office hours (disambiguation) but the business usage is clearly the primary topic. The academic usage could be added to the dab page if we have an appropriate target, but I failed to find one. Thryduulf (talk) 12:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - The collegial academic meaning of this term does not seem to be covered anywhere, which I find surprising. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 06:00, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  It's included at wikt:office hours, which is one reason I included the Wiktionary link on the dab page, but I too wasn't able to find any other use of the term on en.wp. Perhaps there isn't anything encyclopaedic to say about it? Thryduulf (talk) 10:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic or retarget to the disambiguation page?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:32, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Re-target both to Office hours (disambiguation) as there are multiple topics. blue520 17:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• DAB – No primary topic because business meaning and academic meaning are both common. Rename the dab page to "Office hours" and make the other two titles redirect to the renamed dab page. Jruderman (talk) 23:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  Three of the five incoming links are for the academic use. They should be changed to target a new title. I suggest "Office hours in academia" as this phrase is common enough and avoids parentheses. Once the existing incoming links are changed, a link can be included on the dab page, even if it's still red. Academic office hours are the subject of enough published discussion and research to have an article. Jruderman (talk) 23:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  While both are common, the business use is overwhelmingly more common in all the searches I've done and is very clearly the primary topic - especially as we don't have any content about the second most common use. Thryduulf (talk) 11:22, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - I dont think the Dandy would be an appropriate redirect at all. The article doesnt mention it whatsoever, List of Dandy comic strips does and would be a better redirect. But office hours was such a short lived and unpopular comic strip, there isnt anywhere talking about it online, that I dont think there should be a redirect for it. I'd retarget to Business hours Eopsid (talk) 14:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget To Business Hours per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

The Emperor's New Mind: Concering Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics

• The Emperor's New Mind: Concering Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics → The Emperor's New Mind  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as implausible due to a typo: Concering rather than Concerning. This was created in 2013 as a redirect to its current target, unlike many typo redirects that are the result of pagemoves. There are just three edits in its history: creation, adding {{R from full name}}, and now this RFD. Nyttend (talk) 02:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom, implausible mis-spelling. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• Move without redirect to The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics, which is allowed per WP:PMRC#3. That title without the typo is plausible and useful (for example if someone adds a link to the full title of the book in another article), this one not so much. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 13:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, probably a G6 even...and there's no point in moving the redirect given the significant lack of edit history. If you want the full title as a redirect, you can just make it from scratch (regardless of the outcome here). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Tech for Palestine

• Tech for Palestine → Wikipedia and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict#Tech for Palestine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete to make way for a new article using the title. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:09, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

why not just do a draft and use G9 or whatever deletion? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 02:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I rarely nominate redirects for deletion. I will go look into that then instead. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

What is the process there if you are able to guide me? Iljhgtn (talk) 03:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Is the article already drafted somewhere? There's no Draft:Tech for Palestine. If it's not already drafted somewhere, we're very unlikely to delete the redirect at this stage.

I will note, however, that the current section redirect doesn't work. If this is kept, even in the short term, we should probably either remove the section target; change it to #Gaza war, where it's mentioned; or create an anchor to the specific part of that section where Tech for Palestine is mentioned. --BDD (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I had not yet created the draft, but I could do so sometime early next week. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Pee pee twp

• Pee pee twp → Pee Pee Township, Ohio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I initially created this because of a request at WP:EFFPR by AxolotlFridge (though Aydoh8 wrote that I don't think that "Pee pee twp" (case sensitive) is a reasonable search term. If it was created, it would likely find itself at WP:RFD.). The redirect was then R3'd by Pppery, but I declined because I thought it was a plausible modification (in particular, "twp" is a common abbreviation of "township"). In any case, my current position is weak keep. Duckmather (talk) 01:42, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

You aren't supposed to decline speedy deletions for pages you created yourself. WP:CSD says For most speedy deletion criteria, the creator of a page may not remove the deletion tag from it; only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

thank you for not letting my attempted redirect completely cease to exist I appreciate it AxolotlFridge (talk) 04:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Harmless and unambiguous. --BDD (talk) 15:18, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Per BDD Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 15

Samurai (Final Fantasy)

• Samurai (Final Fantasy) → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Classes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ninja (Final Fantasy) → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Classes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not described at target. Somebody familiar with the franchise might know where to look for an alternative, but Special:Search/"samurai" "final fantasy" and Special:Search/"ninja" "final fantasy" give too many – generally incidental – results to be of any use. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:05, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Both are redirects from merges (of now deleted content). Thoughts on the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete both. Unmentioned in the targets. Articles from 2006 are unreferenced in-universe blurbs ... which was okay-is on Wikipedia in 2006, but not anymore. (Yet more redirects I've been editing since 2014 ... and then again in 2024 ... interesting stuff.) Steel1943 (talk) 00:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Although the redirect summaries say redirecting to Final Fantasy character classes per merge, it is unclear if a merge happened. Retarget Ninja to List of ninja video games § Games with ninja character classes to the Final Fantasy entry. Jay 💬 18:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  I oppose this option per my similar arguments at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 4#Moldorm. Steel1943 (talk) 22:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 22:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete both per Steel1943. NutmegCoffeeTea (she/her) (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Robo Rampage

• Robo Rampage → Miniclip  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention at target; previously hosted an unsourced article whose content was not merged anywhere. The two other search results for this on the English Wikipedia, Robbie Morrison and Transformers: Rescue Bots Academy, are probably not suitable targets. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Restore without prejudice as a contested BLAR. The last version of the article was not an A7 candidate, and a quick scan of google suggests at least most of it would be verifiable. Whether it is notable or not is a discussion for AfD not RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 20:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Contested how? It was BLARed back in 2016, has sat as a redirect ever since, until said redirect was nominated here just the other day. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Nominating for deletion at RfD is, by definition, contentisting the appropriateness of the redirection. Thryduulf (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, agreeing with the nominator and The1337gamer: Fails WP:GNG – There are no reliable secondary sources covering this game. As always, if someone is able to provide evidence of notability I am willing to reconsider. Additionally, I can find no evidence that this was a contested WP:BLAR. The next edit after the redirection was a nomination for RfD and the nominator has made no indication in support of restoration. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Tavix. Steel1943 (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Restore per Thryduulf. Enix150 (talk) 19:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Enix150: Did you find any evidence of notability? Note that the former article was unreferenced so the WP:BURDEN is on those who wish to restore to provide citation(s) to support the material. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

The Taylor Swift Holiday Collection (Taylor's Version)

• The Taylor Swift Holiday Collection (Taylor's Version) → The Taylor Swift Holiday Collection  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such album with this title has been released; a case of WP:CRYSTALBALL. Ippantekina (talk) 13:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. मल्ल (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete a hasty WP:CRYSTAL creation when such a version hasn't even been announced as far as I know, and either way the target has no mention of this. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as an misleading {{R from incorrect name}}, considering that the use of the phrase "(Taylor's Version)" is technically not a disambiguator but rather designates subjects related to Taylor Swift that have a specific meaning (basically, a rerelease separate from a certain record label), and ... the target includes no such information. Steel1943 (talk) 19:27, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:04, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete because Taylor's Version means something specific and there is not a Taylor's Version of the album. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:34, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Delta Flight 4813

• Delta Flight 4813 → Delta Connection Flight 4819  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delta Air Lines Flight 4813 was originally created (by me .-.) as a typo. Since this was a typo, no need for this redirect. guninvalid (talk) 06:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete ⁠–⁠ Implausible typo as both flight numbers are different. Furthermore, searching for "Delta Flight 4813" actually brings up an incident in 2016 where "Delta [Air Lines] Flight 4813" diverted after experiencing engine issues. [2] [3] Aviationwikiflight (talk) 07:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete when the flights have different numbers and distinct events, these aren't likely to be confused with one another, so current target isn't plausible for redirecting. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 21:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. understandable mistake --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete Per nominator. Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:13, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Enix150 (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Marcus Strokes

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6, WP:CSD#G7 and WP:CSD#A10.

The Deniers: The world-renowned scientists who stoop up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6.

Balitang Amianan

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

Tactics, techniques, and procedures

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Solar, Anomalous, and Magnetospheric Particle Explorer

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Subcompact

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

Make dab; see also Subcompact crossover SUV and Subcompact executive car. 162 etc. (talk) 03:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as an ambiguous WP:PTM, or weak keep and create Subcompact (disambiguation) with the terms stated by the nominator ... but with the caveat that the current target of the nominated redirect is most likely the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT topic. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Comment There are a lot of incoming links. The ones at Mini MPV look like they should be changed. I haven't checked enough of the incoming links to comment on patterns. Jruderman (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee

• Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee → United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The wrongly non-capitalised "committee" makes this an implausible redirect. What are the chances that you'll get everything else right but miss the capitalisation on the last word? If you're already so familiar with this committee that you remember all the words, you're going to know that "Committee" is always capitalised when used with the other words. Nyttend (talk) 03:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Plausible enough to have a committee named "Commerce, Science, and Transportation", or to shorten the official name by just keeping the last four words. Of the top 20 Google hits, one (opensecrets) uses the lowercase form in the visible snippet. Jruderman (talk) 00:10, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Second prize in a beauty contest

• Second prize in a beauty contest → Monopoly (game)#Second prize in a beauty contest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Phrase not mentioned at target Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Second prize in a beauty contest closed as "redirect" in January 2011 after content was merged into Chance and Community Chest cards. That page was redirected (without merging) following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chance and Community Chest cards (2nd nomination) in December 2018. Thryduulf (talk) 21:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Obscure, not mentioned at target, more likely to hinder searches than help navigation in any way. Jruderman (talk) 02:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Monopoly here and now limited edition 2005

• Monopoly here and now limited edition 2005 → Monopoly (game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Oddly specific Monopoly edition not mentioned at the target Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This was created as an "article", but that was some of the purest advertising copy I've ever seen on Wikipedia so would be speedily deletable under WP:CSD#G11 if restored. It also wouldn't surprise me if it was a copyright violation too. Google isn't giving me any matches - but I'm unsure of how many 20-year-old adverts are still online to be indexed? Thryduulf (talk) 21:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Butt (sailing)

• Butt (sailing) → Butt joint  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Neither accurate nor usefull. Qwirkle (talk) 06:08, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - Butt is definitely a sailing related term [4] but I'm not sure what the best target would be on Wikipedia, or even if we have an appropriate target available. Golem08 (talk) 13:16, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Nahh. That’s a general carpentry term. Butted planks and butt blocks are used in wooden boatbuilding and shipbuilding, but also in house carpentry, concrete formwork, furniture…hell, even field fortification…name it, if you use planks, that’s the simplest (crudest?) way to put them together, and the same vocabulary is used across most disciplines. And I don’t think a reference work should classify things by arms-length connections. Shipbuilding isn’t sailing any more than driving a car is automotive engineering. Qwirkle (talk) 14:16, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

The question here is not how the subject is classified, but whether this is a plausible search term for the target. We do not require people to have detailed knowledge of what they are looking up before they have looked it up. Thryduulf (talk) 15:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Why would this be a plausible search term? Qwirkle (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not arguing that it is (or isn't), I'm saying that is the question we are here to answer but it is not addressed by your comment. Thryduulf (talk) 10:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• There is Glossary of nautical terms (A–L) § B, but the description there is laughable / not useful. Jay 💬 14:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 01:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Checked into who added the Glossary term and the user who did so made their last edits that day back in 2020. My suggestion would be to ask at WikiProject Ships and WikiProject Sailing if they could help provide a better definition of the term. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Comment I posted a notice at WikiProject Sailing. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:38, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Gottlieb Institute

• Gottlieb Institute → Leslie D. Gottlieb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No evidence this institute ever existed. May be a hoax. The previous state of the article, before becoming a redirect, did not verify its own existence (the sources don't mention the purported institute or Colorado at all), and while I don't know all the intimate details of Leslie D. Gottlieb's life, it seems a bit suspicious that he would be founding a research center in Denver between his undergrad at Cornell and finishing his masters at the University of Michigan (especially since he graduated with a B.A. in English and "after writing fiction and non-fiction for seven years and working as an architectural magazine editor in New York, he moved with his family to Taos, New Mexico" before moving to Michigan to pursue botany). No credible evidence this institute has ever existed has ever been provided. If the institute never existed, there is no reason to keep the redirect. --Animalparty! (talk) 03:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• delete or retarget to Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute. And a quick search showed up even more "Gottlieb Institute"s, as the george gottlieb institute, maybe someday that would be a disambiguation... - Nabla (talk) 14:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

If any retargeting occurs, I think the prior content should be fully deleted as a likely hoax, rather than being preserved in the edit history. So this discussion is also a de facto deletion discussion, since the former article PROD was declined. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Fine by me. - Nabla (talk) 23:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:59, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Nom has demonstrated that it's a hoax, and the risk is small, but not non-existent, that someone would examine the article history and believe that it was real. I might think differently if recreating were difficult, but if I were closing this discussion, I could delete and recreate this redirect faster than I can type out this rationale. Nyttend (talk) 04:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Purgegate

• Purgegate → Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is mentioned on neither the 2006 or 2017 pages, 2006 dismissal of U.S. attorneys, 2017 dismissal of U.S. attorneys. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:19, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

• Weak delete This term also appears to have been used for the 2006 scandal but not as heavily. Most of my hits actually pull up some sort of valve system, which makes me question whether the scandal would be the primary topic here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:41, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

(Original author) keep This term was widely used at the time, and a Google search now for '"purgegate" us attorneys' produces many results. [5], [6], [7], [8], [9] Bovlb (talk) 18:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bovlb: just FYI, the current target is now a DAB page. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:21, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

That seem appropriate. Bovlb (talk) 22:30, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:37, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to the 2007 page, secondarily delete. Most results are various valves, but after some aggressive filtering all hits seem to be for the 2007 incident, which was pretty regularly called that. Rusalkii (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:54, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Rusalkii, you say "the 2007 page". The options are 2006 or 2017; which do you mean? Nyttend (talk) 03:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  2006, oops. Rusalkii (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Knowledge Graph

• Knowledge Graph → Google Knowledge Graph  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should it point to Google Knowledge Graph or Knowledge graph? The latter seems a better target to avoid confusion. Frost 09:44, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Capitalized Knowledge Graph is the actual name of the Google product, and in that proper noun form the product should be the target for those who are actually looking for the dang thing. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 13:20, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

As of this comment, a requested move involving this redirect is still open. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:34, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 22:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Knowledge graph - I don't think the capitalization is distinctive here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since the linked move request is still open, which affects this redirect. (Probably should have not nominated this redirect until the move request closed since the move request came first, but here we are.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Procedural close. Given the existence of the still-open RM, either this RFD will end up with the same result as the RM (redundant) or they'll conflict, which would be very confusing and hard to assess what should be done. Let the RM run its course, and in the future we can revisit the RFD if needed. Nyttend (talk) 04:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Procedural close pending the outcome of the RM. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

May 14

Have You Seen Her (T-Pain song)

• Have You Seen Her (T-Pain song) → T-Pain  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• T-Pain Have you seen her → T-Pain  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Could not find any evidence that this song actually exists, and it's not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia so I don't see a good reason for this redirect to exist. Also nominating T-Pain Have you seen her. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:47, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Have U Seen Her, possibly a hoax. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 12:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Οἶδα (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Note T-Pain Have you seen her was not tagged or properly listed here until just now. Thryduulf (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Forgot that part, my mistake. Thanks Thryduulf! QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. An article claiming this would be the lead single from a then-forthcoming T-Pain album was created at T-Pain Have you seen her, moved to Have You Seen Her (T-Pain song) and then moved again to Have U Seen Her. After the album was released the article was sent to AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Have U Seen Her) for being a mix of incorrect and unverifiable, and consensus was in favour of deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Looking at the history of the redirects, it appears that the Have U Seen Her article was WP:BLARed to T-Pain in October 2008, a couple months before its eventual deletion. Because of the BLAR, these redirects are no longer eligible for speedy deletion under WP:G8, but given that there's no evidence of any actual song having this name, I believe that the same rationale that undergirds G8 also justifies deleting these. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:53, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per reasons above. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:29, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Terkey

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

Asgfvje

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

Hottest

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

Phrase not exclusive to the target. Would have been an WP:X1 candidate if the criterion was still active. Steel1943 (talk) 21:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Heat Apparently "Hottest" is superlative form of adjective "Hot", which means "Heat". So, it is more necessary retarget "Hottest" to more specific article. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 04:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  "Hot" does not mean "heat". The former is an adjective that can mean "of a high temperature", but can also mean "spicy", "popular", "sexually attractive", and probably some other things I'm not thinking of right off the bat. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 05:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Basically, I echo what "35.139.154.158" said: There is no WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT target for the nominated redirect, which is the superlative form of "hot". Steel1943 (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Hot (a disambiguation page), per 35.139.154.158 it has multiple meanings other than temperature. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 07:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  I oppose "Retarget to Hot" since the majority of the subjects at Hot cannot be referred to as "hottest", especially the several proper names for media, which makes this nominated redirect targeting Hot a problematic WP:PTM situation. Steel1943 (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Nominator stance clarification: Unless it is determined that "Hottest" is the proper name for something (media, book, etc.), to clarify my stance and make it specific, delete or weak retarget to Wiktionary:hottest. Steel1943 (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as vague at best. _{Alternatively, Retarget to User:Lenticel} --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:09, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete ambiguous with no good target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Hotness, which lists things that can be described as "hottest". Most of IP35's list is there. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:08, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. I think it's fairly pointless to maintain redirects for such ambiguous inflected forms. If a reader doesn't know what "hottest" means because their English proficiency is low, they should use a dictionary such as Wiktionary. If a reader wants to know about heat, spiciness, popularity, or attractiveness, "Hottest" is not a very natural search term, and the reader can surely find a way to rephrase their query, for instance by using a more natural form of the word like "Hot" or "Hotness". Second choice: retarget to Hotness, but in that case we should add Popularity to the list there. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Template:Grand Prix

• Template:Grand Prix → Template:Belgian Film Critics Association Grand Prix  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Exceptionally ambiguous template redirect likely to cause confusion. Οἶδα (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete This template was moved over two years ago, and no links or transclusions remain. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:58, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete minor topic taking up a major name -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. There's absolutely no way to determine any specific target anyone could be looking for when searching this title. Steel1943 (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:07, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disability-related articles

• Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disability-related articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Disability/Style advice  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I normally wouldn't touch an {{R from move}} page, or a redirect that's this old, but I just saw this WikiProject essay get cited from the "MOS" name, as if it were an actual guideline, in a POV-pushing way. There are very few links to this page. Perhaps we can live without this one? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The solution to an editor using a redirect to push a POV is to deal with the editor in the same way we would deal with them if they had linked to the target directly. Thryduulf (talk) 11:15, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 19:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Non-MoS pages should never have MoS related redirects (or page names). Gonnym (talk) 14:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

The L/L Research Transcripts

• The L/L Research Transcripts → UFO religion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Same rationale as other redirect. This is not mentioned at target. It may be notable, but it is not mentioned anywhere onwiki and has no history. It was never mentioned at this target. Also, this isn't even really a UFO religion thing, strictly speaking, so it doesn't even get the reader to a logical place. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

L/L Research

• L/L Research → UFO religion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is not mentioned at target. It may be notable, but it is not mentioned anywhere onwiki and has no history. It was never mentioned at this target. Also, this isn't even really a UFO religion thing, strictly speaking, so it doesn't even get the reader to a logical place. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Both of these appear to be related to "Law of One", a new age group that is notable, but which we do not have an article on. This can be remade if someone makes that article. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

First period

• First period → First Period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Considering the extensive hatnote at the target article (noting the first menstrual cycle, or first menstrual bleeding at Menarche, the first period in ice hockey at ice hockey, the first period of chemical elements at Period 1 element, and the communist doctrinaire period discussed at Third Period, as well as the concept of "first period" in school, I think that "First period" at this capitalization should be a disambiguation page. BD2412 T 17:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

@BD2412: Just curious: Why did you choose this route (RfD) instead of creating First period (disambiguation) and then submitting a move request? Steel1943 (talk) 20:02, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

@Steel1943: I honestly was lazy to make the disambiguation page, though in retrospect it would have taken about the same amount of time as filing this RfD. I'll do it now. BD2412 T 20:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Disambig per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• The same argument also applies to the capitalized version IMO. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)
  • I would support moving First Period to First Period (architecture). The phrase does not seem particularly conducive to a primary topic. BD2412 T 21:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

    I would support that too, with the capitalised version redirecting to the lowercase disambig. Thryduulf (talk) 16:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

    Agreed. BD2412 T 20:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Alaska C-I7 plane crash

• Alaska C-I7 plane crash → 2010 Alaska USAF C-17 crash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Alaska C-17 plane crash → 2010 Alaska USAF C-17 crash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wrong symbol (uses a capital I instead of a 1). Delete. Mr slav999 (talk) 16:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

• Is this not a plausible enough mistake to keep? It gets picked up by OCR sometimes. As a redirect, it seems harmless enough, it was a former title of the page, it gets over a view per month, and it's unambiguous (assuming Alaska C-17 plane crash is also unambiguous; probably should be tagged as an avoided double redirect to that title). I'll say keep off that. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:52, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete there are several C-17 crashes in Alaska, such as Sitka 43 listed at List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2010–2019) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:17, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
• Bundle the properly titled Alaska C-17 plane crash if the discussion is turning towards ambiguity. Jay 💬 16:02, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundling per Jay
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete – The letter 'i' and the number 1 are almost at the opposite ends of a qwerty keyboard. You really need to make an effort (including pressing Shift) to mix them up, unlike for example the letter 'o' and the number 0. --Deeday-UK (talk) 08:49, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Alaska C-17 plane crash as the primary topic. This is the only Alaskan crash listed at Boeing C-17 Globemaster III#Accidents and notable incidents. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Sexual Anomalies

• Sexual Anomalies → Disorders of sex development  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sexual anomaly → Disorders of sex development  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sexual anomalies → Disorders of sex development  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Sex anomaly is unambiguous because it refers to sex. Paraphilia used to be the target of one of the redirects. Sexual phobias and sexual anorexia are often discussed together with these terms.
Hatnote or disambiguation page? LIrala (talk) 02:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

@LIrala I believe since this was a merge it would fall under WP:RFD#KEEP They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge but I'm not an expert in this tbh. Would you mind indicating which of the WP:RFD#DELETE criteria these fall under? I do see a disambigulation being helpful though. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 04:40, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

@IntentionallyDense: This is redirects for discussion, not deletion; actions such as disambiguation or redirecting an alternative target are often discussed here, and deletion is often not a proposed outcome (which seems to be the case here; the proposed outcomes are placing a hatnote at the current target or turning it into a disambiguation page). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 19:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

My bad, we should really come up with some more acronyms (or I should just fully read the article titles). IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 04:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

7 Grand Dad

• 7 Grand Dad → The Flintstones: The Rescue of Dino & Hoppy#7 GRAND DAD  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not notable enough. If I can't add info about 7 Grand Dad to the page The Flintstones: The Rescue of Dino & Hoppy, then this redirect needs to go.Dr. Precursor (talk) 13:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, unmentioned. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:59, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Vinesauce Oreocooke (talk) 15:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  ...Why? The connection is unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  The meme was originally created using a clip of Vinesauce’s reaction to the game. Dr. Precursor (talk) 17:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete if not mentioned in the target by the time this discussion closes. The current target seems to be the most applicable target due to it essentially being an alternative version of the current target, but as stated, the redirect is currently not mentioned in the target. Also, apparently, besides Vinesauce (where the redirect is currently not mentioned), this redirect also has affinity to SiIvaGunner (where is redirect is currently mentioned), so retargeting to either would be a potential WP:XY issue. Either way, if this gets deleted, Template:The Flintstones should probably be updated to remove the reference to "7 GRAND DAD". Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:DPROCESS

• Wikipedia:DPROCESS → Wikipedia:Deletion process  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I originally put up this redirect for it to be a shortcut to the deletion process page because the page had no main shortcut, but now, the main shortcut to this page is "WP:DELPRO", which sounds much better than "WP:DPROCESS". Furthermore, WP:D stands for Wikipedia:Disambiguation, which could be confusing to someone trying to look up how to create disambiguations, thinking that they are going to find the "Disambiguation process". I could have just requested speedy deletion per WP:G7, but I'll let the community decide whether the redirect should be deleted, kept or retargeted. RaschenTechner (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep for those who wish to use this shortcut, which would be available for use whether or not it's one of the advertised shortcuts. Personally, I like DPROCESS better than DELPRO (which to me sounds more like someone in favor of deletion). There is no page for Wikipedia:Disambiguation process, so I don't see ambiguity as an issue. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as a WP:G7. When I saw this in the TOC, I thought it was for something akin to 'due process' instead. It's only been here a few weeks and is unused. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  Speedy deletion isn't an option since Tavix voted for something other than deletion. Steel1943 (talk) 18:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. I agree with Tavix. I can find only three pages in the Wikipedia namespace that start with "D" and include the word "process" in the title: Wikipedia:Deletion process, Wikipedia:Decision Making Process (marked as a historical project page, but essentially just an essay from 2002), and Wikipedia:Don't just ignore the process (a humorous essay) and this is a plausible shortcut for only one of them - the current one. Thryduulf (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Moving contact lubricant

• Moving contact lubricant → Lubricant#Keep moving parts apart  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Moving Contact Lubricant → Lubricant#Keep moving parts apart  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not directly mentioned in the target article or section (specifically, the use of the word "contact" does not match content in the target) in a way which could satisfy readers to believe they have found the subject of the redirect. Seems this topic may also have a connection to the subject at Moving parts. Steel1943 (talk) 07:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for raising this issue! It's been a long time since I created these redirects, so I no longer have the context of why I did it; but the fact that I created one also with the capitalized form of the term leads me to think I might have come across it as an acronym (MCL). Strangely, the "Keep moving parts apart" section was almost identical at the time to its current contents, so the lack of mention of the specific expression "moving contact" (or even of merely "contact") would already be puzzling back then. I don't think the contents of Moving parts are particularly more enlightening than those of Lubricant in the sense of being intuitive targets for the redirect, apart for the use of the term "contact".

Therefore, my suggestion would be to either tweak the text of Lubricant#Keep moving parts apart so as to include the term "contact" (which sounds easy enough, following e.g. the phrasing used in Moving parts), or remove the redirects if we decide we can't make the connection obvious. My preference would be for the former approach, but since I've long forgotten how I came across that term in the first place, I don't really mind either outcome. Waldyrious (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Automatic lubricating cup

• Automatic lubricating cup → Lubricant  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Automatic Lubricating Cup → Lubricant  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This phrase, and specifically the word "cup", is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving it unclear why readers would be redirected to the target article when searching these terms. Steel1943 (talk) 07:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep since it's an important invention with lots of coverage in sources. It has good possibilities for a section, or even an article, but at least a mention. Better to fix the lack of mention than to delete it. Dicklyon (talk) 15:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  ...Something being that notable seems to be eligible for WP:REDLINK if it's not mentioned. Steel1943 (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  Keep but Retarget per Mdewman6 below. Dicklyon (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Automatic lubricator#Displacement lubricator for now, and add a mention. This seems to refer to patented invention by Elijah McCoy, known as The real McCoy; both articles mention his "oil-drip cup invention", but the best target would be the article describing the invention and related things, not the inventor or terms derived from the invention. There is old content at Automatic Lubricating Cup but it would definitely be a case of WP:TNT if brought to AfD, as it is more about McCoy than the invention. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Bianca de Vera

• Bianca de Vera → 2 Good 2 Be True  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Filipino actress is unmentioned. No mention of "Bianca", "de", nor "Vera" at the target article. 124.104.16.92 (talk) 01:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete: I see "Bianca de Vera as Patricia "Pat" M. Cunanan : younger sister of Ali" in the supporting cast section. However, I also see search results for "Bianca de Vera" on several other pages, and none to suggest that this is the most valuable target for the name. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Restore. There's been a couple attempts to create an article on her now and she has enough credits that notability is likely. The edit summary of the first redirection back in December admitted as such, but still redirected anyway due to a lack of coverage. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  Huh??? 124.104.16.92 (talk) 03:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

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

Feminist history in Latin America

• Feminist history in Latin America → Role of women in the Nicaraguan Revolution  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This should probably redirect to feminism in Latin America instead. ★Trekker (talk) 08:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Support retarget, as more apropriate scope. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:37, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Feminism in Latin America per nom. I'm not sure who create this redirect for Role of women in the Nicaraguan Revolution because it didn't describe about Latin America as whole. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 10:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

It seems to be the result of several moves.★Trekker (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Support per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Shatter belt (geopolitcs)

• Shatter belt (geopolitcs) → Shatter belt (geopolitics)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is the only use of "geopolitcs" in any name. The other two uses is an instance in the name of an organization, which should probably be fixed, and a use in a source name, which should not be fixed (assuming the typo is also in the source name itself) User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• The target page was originally created with the spelling mistake. After 2 days I moved it to a more correct name. I am quite happy for the redirect to be eliminated. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
  • Graeme's opinion is no weightier than that of other editors, since the person who created the title is Македонец. Nyttend (talk) 21:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as obviously created in error. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Square root of 4

• Square root of 4 → 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Square root of 9 → 3  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Sqrt4 → 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unneeded, it's very unlikely that someone would look for the articles for 2 and 3 through this. Wikipedia is not a calculator. Square root of 1 was deleted for similar reasons in a 2019 RfD. I am bad at usernames (talk) 03:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Square root of 4 to set a consistent pattern with the articles Square root of 2, Square root of 3, Square root of 5, Square root of 6, Square root of 7. That was the same reason I created Square root of 9 last year, but I acknowledge the argument is weaker there since there is no Square root of 8 article. And if I had seen the 2019 RfD I would probably have supported keeping it for that reason too. And 9 is as far as this will go - I did not create (and would support deleting if someone else created) Square root of 16 Square root of 25 etc. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:42, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Also adding Sqrt4 to this for the same reason, I didn't notice it when creating the RfD. I am bad at usernames (talk) 03:45, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  Weak keep Sqrt4 by the same argument: Sqrt2 Sqrt3 Sqrt5 Sqrt6 Sqrt7. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  I wasn't aware of those Sqrt redirects. They are clearly not "necessary", yet are among the kinds of things we keep just because someone might possibly invoke them at some point. There are a ton of miscapitalized redirects that we keep around even though they do a lot of actual harm by showing up in the Visual Editor popup that invites people to link them. I'd say if we're keeping objectively harmful redirects, why not keep the potentially useful ones, too? Dicklyon (talk) 05:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as this is potentially useful for our readers. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:35, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  Excuse me what? I have to call bullshit on this one. If someone so badly needs to know what the square roots of 4 or 9 are and can't figure it out some other way, they should go to our article on the square root itself, not to the specific value they type in. This also doesn't really address the "WP isn't a calculator" argument -- why stop here? Why not Square root of 2209 -> 47 (number)? Or 1+(2*3) -> 7? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  I explained above why this should stop where it does. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all. I was going to write a couple sentences, but they would have been almost identical to the nomination statement. I don't buy the argument that a sequence of titles has to be complete if anything in that sequence is sufficiently different, as is the case here. As a side note, I'd also advocate deletion of all of the "Sqrtn" redirects as malformed and useless (and all recently created). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Question. Is it possible to have articles on the square root of four and square root of nine that are distinct from the numbers 2 and 3? As far as I recall, both positive and negative integers are square roots of the positive integer. BD2412 T 18:32, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  "Is it possible to have articles on the square root of four and square root of nine that are distinct from the numbers 2 and 3?" Is it possible? Of course, in the sense that it's also possible to have an article on the cheeto I found in my bathtub this morning. Is it realistic or even a good idea? No. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  This comment either misconstrues the question or, given the "cheeto in the bathtub" attitude, is unserious. Should Square root of 5 and Square root of 7 exist? These appear to be quite notable. We probably should have articles on Square root of 8 and Square root of 10. The only difference with 4 and 9 is that the square roots are whole numbers. BD2412 T 14:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  It was an inane answer to an inane question, but the point I was making was completely serious. "We probably should have articles on Square root of 8 and Square root of 10." No, we probably shouldn't; we probably shouldn't even have articles for 6 and 7 either, but I don't have the stomach to start AFDs on those. "The only difference with 4 and 9 is that the square roots are whole numbers." That's a pretty big goddamn difference, don't you think? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:47, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Please note that WP:CIVILITY is required to enjoy the right to edit here. It is part of the terms of service that you agree to abide to every time you click "Publish changes" for an edit. BD2412 T 16:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  ... square root of 10 is apparently blue and points to Square root#Square roots of positive integers. I would have no objection to retargeting these redirects there as well. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:02, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all. These redirects are more likely to confuse than clarify. Articles are better served by linking to Square root. Clicking on a link for Square root of 4 but ending up on a page about a different number (2) without an explanation may be disorienting. Brigandeur (talk) 00:23, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Um, what? How is it disorienting to search for "square root of four" and be correctly told that it is two? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  It is disorienting as a link from an article. Searching for random terms is a different usage. Should redirects be used as context-less repositories of facts, like a Jeopardy bot? For example, I wonder who the current King of England is. If I search for that term, I get redirected to the topic of the Monarchy, not the person currently holding that title. Brigandeur (talk) 06:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep all (and promote Draft:Square root of 4 to mainspace), and add content to the target articles about the phenomenon of their being the square roots of the smallest numbers to have whole number square roots. BD2412 T 14:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Facepalm . 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  The square root of 10 actually appears to be independently notable and mathematically significant. See Warren R. Giordano and David Fuller, "Is the Universe Cheating at Math By Using the Square Root of 10 Instead of Pi?". BD2412 T 16:18, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Facepalm Facepalm 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:03, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Your emojis do not seem to be winning anyone to your point of view. BD2412 T 20:29, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  Perhaps not, but it's about all I can muster when someone with over 2 million edits suggests, with a straight face apparently, a blatantly crank physics article hosted on academia.edu as evidence of notability of the square root of 10. You lecture me on civility, and yet you waste other people's time with this stuff. All after asking of the square roots of 4 and 9 could host their own articles separate from our articles on 2 and 3. And then you go on to suggest that a nothing "property" be added to the articles on 4 and 9, which both already mention (the second in passing) that these are square numbers, which is the same thing. Come on. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

  You have misread my proposal. I suggested to add something to the target articles (in this discussion, the redirect targets, 2 and 3) indicating that they are, respectively, the square roots of the smallest even and odd numbers to have whole number square roots. BD2412 T 02:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  First, that's simply not true, and second, those articles already say that they're perfect squares, which is the exact same thing as having a whole number square root. And before you proclaim "oho! then redirect them there!", no, for the reasons already stated by me and Brigandeur. I also misread nothing of the sort, you asked, point blank:

  Question. Is it possible to have articles on the square root of four and square root of nine that are distinct from the numbers 2 and 3?

  . You've turned what should be a fairly mundane discussion into a clusterfuck of red herrings and other nonsense. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  It turns out that it is possible to have articles on the square root of four and square root of nine, and I'm very pleased that now we are going to have these. BD2412 T 01:24, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  Facepalm Facepalm Facepalm 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  Your face must be so red by now. BD2412 T 20:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  (working link: https://www.academia.edu/32723079/Is_the_Universe_Cheating_at_Math_By_Using_the_Square_Root_of_10_Instead_of_Pi?sm=b) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:13, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

• Convert Square root of 4 to article, using Draft:Square root of 4. Dicklyon (talk) 05:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  Oh give it a rest...your years-long trolling with this is just disruptive, and bordering on ANI-worthy. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  If you think something is ANI-worthy, then you should take it to ANI. BD2412 T 17:25, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  Some people have no sense of humor. Dicklyon (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all along with √4, √9, ... √225. Some redirects from mathematical expressions are useful because they correspond to the reason a number it notable or are faster to type (10^9). Others are useful because they redirect to articles about the expression (e^ipi). These are just calculator results that happen to have an article. Jruderman (talk) 04:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  The chance that someone is going to invoke a redirect with such an obscure character is roughly zero. Yet they're harmless. So why bother? Dicklyon (talk) 05:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  They may be harmless from a reader's perspective, but from an editor's perspective they create the impression that there is a pattern that should be followed and that more such redirects should be created (see "That was the same reason I created Square root of 9" above). Should we bother to to create them, or clean these up and move on? Brigandeur (talk) 09:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. I feel as though redirecting these articles will lead to more debate and a domino effect. If "sqrt4" leading to "2" isn't okay for WP, then what making "2^2" redirecting to "4" okay? Why does "sqrt(-1)" redirect to "Imaginary unit"? "10^6" to "1,000,000"? Where does Wikipedia draw the line? Why not have all "derivative of n" articles redirect to 0? It seems a bit contradictory. MontanaMako (talk) 22:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Redirects are cheap. Square root of 4 is a plausible search term or wikilink, and is unambiguously the same number as 2. It should not be a separate article, but some part of Draft:Square root of 4 could plausibly be merged into a section of 2 and the redirect could point at the section. Inre the nomination's "deleted for similar reasons in a 2019 RfD" it should be noted that there was a nominator urging deletion, one "weak delete", one person who retracted their vote, and one comment; there wasn't enough discussion to draw any meaningful conclusions about interested Wikipedians' general consensus. –jacobolus (t) 03:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Cheap and unambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Iyf

• Iyf → International Society for Krishna Consciousness  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. "IYF", regardless of capitalisation, isn't mentioned in the target. The history here looks a bit complicated; originally iyf redirected to ISKCON Youth Forum (IYF) Ahmedabad, which eventually became a redirect to ISKCON Youth Forum Ahmedabad, which eventually became a redirect to this target. (At the same time, IYF was a redirect to ISKCON Youth Forum and got deleted after that page was deleted, but it wasn't restored when that page became a redirect to this redirect's target.) Happy to withdraw this if someone can explain a good reason for "iyf" redirecting here, but I can't see such a reason right now. Nyttend (talk) 03:08, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• disambiguate there are many uses of IYF on Wikipedia Robert College § International Istanbul Youth Forum (IYF), International Year of Freshwater listed at List of environmental dates, International Youth Federation explained at History of youth work, NYSE ticker IYF listed at List of American exchange-traded funds, I.Y.F. song from the album Sanity Obscure, -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Disambig per the IP editor. Thryduulf (talk) 22:48, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
• dabify per 65.92 --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:16, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• dab tla, then ask at WP:RFPP for IYF to be unsalted so the dab page can be moved to the correct title. Jruderman (talk) 05:46, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Note: I have unprotected IYF. There is no need for continuing protection over a disruptive editing issue at that title that was resolved well over a decade ago. BD2412 T 03:18, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 13

Early Start

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

CNN This Morning with Kasie Hunt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Welcome to Molliwood

• Welcome to Molliwood → Sonny with a Chance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Welcome To Mollywood → Sonny with a Chance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Welcome to Mollywood → Molly Parkin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Welcome to Holliwood" and "Welcome to Mollywood" are both titles related to the series. But is this variation needed? RanDom 404 (talk) 18:22, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Welcome to Mollywood (disambiguation) which has an entry for Sonny with a Chance, and shows Welcome to Mollywood redirecting to the Molly Parkin autobiography as the primary topic. Welcome To Mollywood (uppercase T) redirects to Sonny with a Chance, and can be retargeted to Molly Parkin as well. Jay 💬 17:44, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Welcome to Mollywood (disambiguation) and move it to the base title. I don't think Molly Parkin is the primary topic—if anything it's the mixtape. The variant Welcome To Mollywood should also redirect to the disambiguation. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundling Welcome To Mollywood and Welcome to Mollywood into this discussion, given the trajectory of the discussion after the initial nomination statement. Also, notified all applicable redirects' creators' talk pages, all redirects' targets' talk pages, and Talk:Welcome to Mollywood (disambiguation).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget both to Sonny with a Chance. NutmegCoffeeTea (she/her) (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

@RanDom 404, Jay, and Tavix: Pinging current participants to make them aware of the bundling of the additional redirects. (Totally meant to do this earlier, apologies for the tardiness.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Welcome to Mollywood should be the DAB page. These are all minor topics, I would say. Snowman (talk) 10:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Rico Yamaguchi

• Rico Yamaguchi → List of former members of AKB48#Graduated members  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

AV alias of Rina Nakanishi, whose article was deleted in October 2017. As the page only keeps track of names as when they are in the group, there is no way to fit her AV name on the target. FMecha (to talk|to see log) 19:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Prashant Sharma

• Prashant Sharma → IIT (ISM) Dhanbad#Controversies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. The unrelated Prashant Sharma (politician) exists, so maybe delete and move that article over the redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete and move with a hatnote to Prashant P. Sharma per nom. मल्ल (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Ultima (spell)

• Ultima (spell) → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Magic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ultima (Final Fantasy) → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Magic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ultima Weapon → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series#Monsters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Final fantasy ultima → DigiCube#Ultimania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention at target. Special:Search/"ultima" "final fantasy" has some relevant mentions; not sure whether any of them is a suitable alternative. The last one was apparently originally about the same as the other three, and I am not fully sure it is pertinent, but Ultimania points at a different article so it should probably be consistent with either that or the three mentioned above. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:45, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: any other thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 02:49, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try, and any thoughts on the pre-redirect page content?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:24, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment "Ultima Weapon" is bad, since it could refer to weapons from Ultima unrelated to Final Fantasy (such as Ultima (series)). If the edit history needs keeping, it should be dispalced to Ultima (Final Fantasy weapon) and redlinking the current title -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete all as these seem very obscure. NutmegCoffeeTea (she/her) (talk) 03:37, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Benz (2025 tamil film)

• Benz (2025 tamil film) → Benz (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Just started filming, highly unlikely it will release this year. If it does at all, it would better be Benz (2025 Tamil film). Kailash29792 (talk) 14:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes of course apparently they said the shoot will last more than 120 days aprox yes bring back the benz 2025 tamil film. Leo2324 (talk) 19:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is the only film with the title "Benz"; 2025 or Tamil were unnecessary. Jay 💬 15:17, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

MOGAI and others

• MOGAI → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Commonly used queer acronyms → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Commonly Used Queer Acronyms and their Meanings → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MVPFAFF+ → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MVPFAFF → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget back to LGBTQ (term) or List of LGBTQ acronyms? --MikutoH ^talk! 02:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget MVPFAFF and MVPFAFF+ to LGBTQ (term)#MVPFAFF, where the term is defined. Retarget the remaining to List of LGBTQ acronyms. This list seems like the best target for the two more generic redirects, and MOGAI is also mentioned there. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:44, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Noting that MOGAI may be gaining sufficient references to be considered notable and qualify for an article rather than a redirect. Taylor & Francis has two books by different authors or editors discussing this term, The Great Pronoun Shift: The Big Impact of Little Parts of Speech, By Helene Seltzer Krauthamer, 2021, and Queer Technologies: Affordances, Affect, Ambivalence, edited by Adrienne Shaw and Katherine Sender, 2017. Thisisnotatest (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2025 (UTC) (Edited Thisisnotatest (talk) 04:27, 27 April 2025 (UTC))

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the suggested targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget all to List of LGBTQ acronyms, with no prejudice to future articles for any that are notable.--Trystan (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

  LGBTQ (acronym)#MOGAI explains more detailedly than the list. same for MVPFAFF. --MikutoH ^talk! 15:46, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

  That is currently the case, but there is no reason why the entry in the list couldn't be expanded to include the additional detail. Conceptually, it makes more sense to me to redirect to a list of LGBTQ acronyms (which naturally includes these acronyms in its scope) than to an article specifically on the acronym LGBTQ.--Trystan (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Chyrhyryn Soviet Republic

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Urges

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Physiology or Medicine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Google Scholar and Academic Libraries

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Azerbaiyan

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Citizens Protective League

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: moot

Kurt Mertig

• Kurt Mertig → National Renaissance Party (United States)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Mertig is notable and this article contains virtually no information on him. WP:RETURNTORED PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:16, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to having an article about Mertig, since he was a notable person in far-right movements. For the moment though, someone looking him up would likely be well-informed by being redirected to the main party that he founded. PickleG13 (talk) PickleG13 (talk) 04:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it the main party he founded, he is most notable for the CPL, which is my main issue. If he hadn't done that this would be a fine redirect but as is this tells you nothing about him and it redirects to one of the less significant things he did. And that can just as easily be done through the search function. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

That's fair. If you'd like to change it from a red link, let me know, and I'd be happy to assist in the creation of the page. PickleG13 (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. If you are willing to create the page right away, you can simply overwrite the redirect with the article content, we don't have to wait for it to be a REDLINK. But if it's going to be a collborative 6-month project, sure, delete for now. Jay 💬 15:24, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

May 12

Citation templates

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 20#Citation templates

Basal Retinal Neuron

• Basal Retinal Neuron → Bulla (gastropod)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'm not sure what to do with this. It apparently started as a WikiEd article, which was history merged into Bulla (gastropod) (and then Bulla article was moved to this title, which I reversed). I assume basal retinal neurons aren't found only in Bulla, but they are apparently only the subject of study in Bulla gouldiana. The basal retinal neuron content is overwhelming in the Bulla article and I think it is UNDUE (and would also be overwhelming in B. gouldiana).

I think perhaps what should be done with this redirect is to reverse the history merge, and restore the student article (which might then be subject to a deletion discussion). Plantdrew (talk) 23:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

• Reverse history merge per nom. Feel free to ask me to do the technical implementation if that's the consensus, since history merge reversal is a godawful mess at the best of times. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Presidental Unit Citation

• Presidental Unit Citation → Presidential Unit Citation (United States)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Missed this one when attempting to nominate other redirects with the same typo the other day. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 20:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Seems like a plausible misspelling, not a typo. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:24, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Presidential Unit Citation. The typo is plausible, but no less ambiguous than the correct spelling. BD2412 T 19:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per BD2412. Thryduulf (talk) 23:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Xbox Series X

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 20#Xbox Series X

Wikipedia:Tl;dr

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Slovaks in Russia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Albanians in Russia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Slovenes in Russia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

May 11

Poor people's rights

• Poor people's rights → Equality  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I am not sure if we have a page that this is a natural fit for, but the "Equality" disambig page certainly isn't it. I can imagine a redirect to Economic inequality, as at least much more on topic? But that isn't really talking about rights at all, just the general existence of economic inequality. There's an ACLU handbook of poor people's rights, which isn't mentioned anywhere on wiki. I think the most common use of this phrase is for various social safety net programs? Rusalkii (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• The current target is definitely wrong. I'm wondering whether a set index would be the right fit here? A couple of minutes searching finds Poor People's Alliance, Poor People's Economic Human Rights Campaign, Poor People's Campaign, Poor People's Movements, Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for a Moral Revival and English Poor Laws which all seem to deal with some aspect of this search term, and I strongly suspect there are more. Thryduulf (talk) 00:18, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
• Per a suggestion of @Thryduulf at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Navigation pages, I agree that it could be fit to be a navigation page, which would match better than either a set index or redirect. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:58, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

+1 on the {{navigation page}} conversion. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Set Index Article or Navigation page? For reference, we have 3 navpages on enwiki, and one is at AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:55, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Navigation pages are still under discussion and have not yet achieved official consensus. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Welfare rights if that's the best option, otherwise delete. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  On second thought, not everything that could fall under the umbrella of "poor people's rights" may have something to do with welfare. Some people and organizations are mentioned as advocating for "the rights of poor people", but that phrase doesn't seem to be well-defined, so delete for sure. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as we don't seem to have a suitable target. It might be possible to write a reasonable article about this topic, in which case I support doing so. I'm not convinced a navigation page makes sense here, but if someone wants to try that, I have no objections. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:47, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Dancing Bush

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shelly (character)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

German Film Museum

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 20#German Film Museum

Faraday's law induction

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Faraday's Law of Induction

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Faraday's Law Of Induction

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Citations templates

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wubwubwub and Wub wub wub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 18#Wubwubwub and Wub wub wub

DXYK

• DXYK → List of GMA Network radio stations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. No mention of "DXYK" at target page, became a redirect as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DXYK just in case it ever became notable 1 year later. 124.104.16.92 (talk) 06:49, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep, while it's not mentioned on the target, I guess this is because it's not an active station, as opposed to bearing no relevance. That said, it has some history from the former article and the AfD result ended in a redirect specifically to avoid a scenario of deleting it outright. As the initialism was relevant once to a GMA radio station, I don't see any harm keeping this redirect. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:44, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:08, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• Should it target DZBB-AM where "DXYK 1179" pipes to at the {{Butuan Radio}} template? Jay 💬 13:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Creation (Dragonlance)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Rational function field

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

May 10

Kashmir earthquake

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Cacapoopoopeepeeshire

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cacapoopoo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cancer in Iowa

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Death in biology

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep

Extra time

• Extra time → Overtime (sports)#Association football  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect was changed to be to the association football section back in 2024. However, since the lead of the target says "Overtime (OT) or extra time", it should drop the section part. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 16:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment. For anyone else thinking "didn't we discuss this recently?", that discussion was Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#A.e.t. and so not directly relevant. When looking for that I did discover Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 29#Additional time (and subsequent sections) where Additional time, After extra time, Injury time and Stoppage time were all retargetted to Overtime (sports) as they were determined not to relate exclusively to association football. Stoppage time was subsequently retargetted to Association football#Duration and tie-breaking methods and Additional time made a disambig between that and Overtime (sports). Thryduulf (talk) 17:31, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
• Comment the nominator is correct that this is not exclusive to any one sport, however my searches found that additional time in academic exams is equally common. I've not found a single good target for that meaning, with everything being passing mentions and or country-specific. Thryduulf (talk) 17:31, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
• Comment @Justjourney: Can you cite examples of other sports that commonly use "Extra time" rather than overtime? 162 etc. (talk) 19:03, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

  Dictionary definition: [10] (generic "sports"), Collins: [11]

  Some sources past the sports results refer to exams [12], [13], [14]. Maybe writing an article about this exam extra time thing may be a possibility? I haven't found many sources about other sports that use extra time. I may withdraw this nomination, but I"m not making any decisions right now. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 19:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

  Can you cite examples of other sports that commonly use "Extra time" rather than overtime? Handball, Gaelic football, hurling, field hockey, water polo, ... I stopped looking at that point. Thryduulf (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate extratime/extra time - for exams and sports, such as we have overtime (disambiguation); there also being the videogame ESPN MLS ExtraTime 2002 (gamebox showing "ExtraTime"), Extratime.com -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:18, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Even if this redirect is going to be kept, it needs to be fully protected so that the article cannot be easily recreated. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 15:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Urodelus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

President and Fellows of Harvard College v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Indo-Pakistani war of 2025

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bryce Bonnin

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Phoenix Down

• Phoenix Down → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Phoenix down → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Fenix Down → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pheonix down → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pheonix Down → Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. Minimal information exists at Final_Fantasy_VI#Localization; there is also a band named after the item, which is mentioned at Kane_Roberts#Career, as well as Phoenix Down (The Unguided song). As for the last two, I am not sure the misspelling is likely enough to warrant a redirect independent of the outcome for the other three. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:23, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep I have added a section in the article referencing them, and they could be further refined to point to the section. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
• No opinion I was invited to this discussion by some entity - human or bot - that was under the impression that I had some interest in this topic/discussion, which I apparently do not, as I do not show up in the history of any of these pages. While I do appreciate being advised of anything I might be interested or involved in, it might help people if it told what specific page or issue triggered someone's involvement. I mean, where I have interest or involvement with something I do appreciate a warning, but, to put it bluntly, I don't know what the hell I did to be honored with the privilege of this invite. Thank you for reading.
  
  "Understanding of things by me is only made possible by viewers (of my comments) like you."
  
  Thank you.
  Paul Robinson Rfc1394 (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

@Rfc1394: I do not show up in the history of any of these pages. Of course you do. You created Phoenix down in September 2008 (as you can see here), which explains why you were notified by the nominator. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:32, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• The added mention has been removed for relying on iffying sourcing. Rusalkii (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The added mention was restored. Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:43, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep; refine to section or anchor: It's currently mentioned in the article, and it's unlikely for it to be removed from the article as a result of having an open RfD discussion. Jruderman (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Personal respect

• Personal respect → Individual  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target page does not discuss respect of any sort. Seems too vague for a retarget, though if there's a philosophical concept that maps relatively cleanly to this that may be a good fit? Rusalkii (talk) 22:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. My immediate thought was this redirect could mean "self respect" (which redirects to Self-esteem), but with the way this redirect is structured means it could refer to someone respecting someone else. Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
• Comment we do have Respect for persons, which is close to what I get from the search term but I'm undecided if it is close enough. I also wondered about respecting personal boundaries, but the personal boundaries article (the closest title I could find to that search string) is not a good fit imo. Thryduulf (talk) 01:30, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Respect for persons per Thryduulf. Jay 💬 15:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  Struck after reading the below comments. Jay 💬 09:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment as nom: respect for persons is pretty far from what I'd think of if I said "Personal respect", I think I'd still prefer deletion, but the proposed target seems much better than the current one. Rusalkii (talk) 06:57, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment: I'm still leaning "delete" since the phrase is ambiguous, and I'm leaning towards this phrase being more attached to Self-esteem than Respect for persons. Steel1943 (talk) 14:40, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I think respect for persons is closer than self esteem, but I do agree that neither are quite right. Thryduulf (talk) 11:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Roubke

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

Unlikely misspelling. Does not seem to be attested on the web either. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:18, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep it's a very likely typo. If you enter it to Google (or even Facebook) you will find roubles. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 23:45, 23 April 2025 (UTC).
  
• Delete since the "k" is unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 00:00, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
  • It's next to the 'l' in the keyboard, making it quite likley. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 12:53, 24 April 2025 (UTC).
    

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:40, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep. Plausible typo of an alternate spelling. -insert valid name here- (talk) 21:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Steel, and as it's ambiguous. This can be a misspelling of Rubke, the German village, as well. Jay 💬 15:57, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:27, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - per Jay - ambiguous, not obvious what the searcher is looking for BugGhost 🦗👻 08:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep Per Rich Farmbrough Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Jay and BugGhost. Ambiguous misspelling, which can also refer to Rübke, as previously mentioned. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:15, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Infotech

• Infotech → Information technology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Currently redirects to Information technology, and all links from articles shown at Special:WhatLinksHere/Infotech are referring to a company. The target article currently has "Infotech" redirects here and is not to be confused with Infotech Enterprises. For the political group, see Information Technology (constituency).

Either delete or retarget redirect for now (disambiguation would be better, but unless there are 2 or more companies/articles with the name of Infotech), while noting that User:Info-Tech Research Group is attempting to create an article for Info-Tech Research Group. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 21:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - I have removed the incoming links referring to the company. When we have an article for the research group, we can create a disambiguation page. Jay 💬 16:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Jay. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thiatetrazole

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus

Oxatetrazole

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus which means anyone who wishes to can restore as a bold action

Americo Tomasso

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Utah NHL names

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: refine

Ensues

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Mcds

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

I suggest moving to MCDS and retargeting to Marin Country Day School CapitalSasha ~ talk 16:54, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Feel free to create the other redirect if necessary, but there's rather strong ambiguity this redirect has with McDonald's. Steel1943 (talk) 17:32, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

  Actually, retarget to McDonald's. There's nothing else on MCD this redirect could refer to. Steel1943 (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

  Alternatively, weak disambiguate per my discoveries about the WP:DIFFCAPS issues between variations of this letter combination as I discovered in my response to 162 etc.. Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment: @User:Steel1943 If Mcds retargets to McDonald's, then shouldn't mcd also redirect to McDonalds? Also, if multiple abbreviations for MCDS exists, then Mcds should become a disambiguation page instead. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 22:01, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Answer to first question is "No, primarily due to the overwhelming amount of subjects listed at MCD". Answer to second sentence is "We deal with present situations, not WP:CRYSTAL, when redirect and article titles are involved". Steel1943 (talk) 22:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Marin Country Day School (note that MCDS, in all caps, already points there) and add a hatnote to MCD and McDonald's there. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 03:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

What actually happened was MCDS was created after the first relist, given its existence is no longer compatible with the nominator's initial statement. Steel1943 (talk) 14:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

• LR.127 created it based on request of 88.235.230.142 whose reason was From other capitalisation. From the plural form. First preference - Delete as it does not make sense as a plural. Second preference - retarget per nom as an other capitalization. Jay 💬 15:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:57, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Nothing at MCD is realistically known as "Mcds" (not even McDonald's); MCDS already exists and points to the correct primary topic. 162 etc. (talk) 21:22, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

  "MCDS already exists and points to the correct primary topic." Possibly, but this redirect is WP:DIFFCAPS. And regarding this nominated redirect "...not [referring to] McDonald's": That's just straight up not true. The search for "mcds" on DuckDuckGo returns primarily results for McDonald's ... and this is the case for searching this term from several countries. (I have now tried USA, Canada, and Japan, and all have McDonald's as their first result.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  For what's its worth though, searching specifically for the all-caps "MCDS" on DuckDuckGo does return Marin Country Day School as one of its first results without McDonald's being anywhere in the top results ... which seems to further validate my WP:DIFFCAPS concern. At this point, I'd have to believe that readers searching for any variation of this redirect that is not all caps, including the nominated redirect, are intending to locate McDonald's. Steel1943 (talk) 21:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

CN-91

• CN-91 → Hong Kong  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think "CN-91" refers to Hong Kong. Searching this on google gives me a bunch of random stuff, such as trains and product identifiers. Maybe delete? Duckmather (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• comment (delete?), Duckmather, It seems to be an old version of ISO 3166 country (subdivision) code. You can find it at the change log at the bottom of iso.org/.../#iso:code:3166:CN. It went from CN-91 to CN-HK. Is it enough to keep? I doubt it, and note that CN-HK is not a WP page. Nor I think we should be chasing such changes, other than updating lists at the ISO code's page - Nabla (talk) 19:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

weak keep I tried searching CN-91 on Bing and it showed up travel and destination information in Hong Kong. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 21:22, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

And those codes seem important too, see User:Thecurran/Subdivisions#C. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 21:45, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to ISO 3166-2:CN#Changes where there is a relevant mention alongside the new CN-HK code. Thryduulf (talk) 00:16, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Nom should have searched on enwiki instead. There are mentions at Handover of Hong Kong and List of NATO country codes, but Thryduulf's suggested target looks to be the central one, as it is essentially the ISO code. Retarget. Jay 💬 06:48, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Vatican Press

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 18#Vatican Press

Cricket Europe

• Cricket Europe → European Cricket Council  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

www.cricketeurope.com is a website which doesn't have a page on English Wikipedia. but, redirecting to the now defunct unrelated council seems misleading. Vestrian24Bio 12:18, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment there might be scope for a disambiguation page at a title like European Cricket with pages like ICC Europe, European Cricket Council, European Cricket Championships, European Cricket League, Women's European Cricket Championship and see alsos to Europeans cricket team, Europeans cricket team (Ceylon), Central Europe Cup and Category:Cricket in Europe. If created then this wouldn't be a bad redirect to that dab page. Thryduulf (talk) 13:57, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:11, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to new disambiguation page per Thryduulf. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 03:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
• New DAB per above BugGhost 🦗👻 08:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and a poor redirect title if we are trying to find another target. A redirect title like Cricket in Europe, maybe. The disambig page may be independently created though. Jay 💬 17:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget To ICC Europe and have other page ending in (disambiguation). Cricket is the second most popular sport in the world, and someone searching Cricket Europe is probably searching for the sport. Unlikely the insect Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete (along with CricketEurope and CricketEurope.com). These redirects would be meant for the cricketeurope.com website, but there is no connection between that website (which is active) and a defunct cricket council. I see no evidence of anything else being referred to as "Cricket Europe" (or variant). -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Mayor of Auburn

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate Whether to move the disambiguation page elsewhere can be handled following the standard procedures for moving pages.

Joehio

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Cyberbullies

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Katwe Combined Boxing Club

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus on whether to restore or delete, hence restore. As keeps happening again and again and again. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:19, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 7

Dorothy of Oz (manhwa)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Module:Citation

• Module:Citation → Template:Citation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirecting a module to a template is confusing and generally a bad idea - the two systems are distinct, not interchangable. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:45, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

As creator weak keep to provide breadcrumb links back to Template:Citation or similar, rather than making navigation more difficult. Alternatively, retarget to Category:Citation templates or Help:Citations or similar, or possibly disambiguate. There was a previous debate as to whether the module should be a redirect to Module:Citation/CS1 but that did not work. Having a redlink as the parent makes navigation unnecessarily difficult. If it should not be a redirect so be it. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 16:54, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh, this again. To avoid yet-another-similar-discussion, restore the 11:38, 21 May 2018 version of the module. For those who can't see deleted modules, that version simply emitted this glaring red error message when Module:Citation was invoked:

The associated ~/doc page had some explanatory text:

Development of Lua support for both Citation Style 1 and Citation Style 2 began at Module:Citation. That development was abandoned in 2013 as development of Module:Citation/CS1 began.

Though this module remained unused, it is and has been the root page of the several module subpages that implement cs1 and cs2. The content of this module was replaced with an error message return as the result of a 2018 TfD.

That was sufficient to occupy space, to explain why there is nothing else there, and to keep those who care about bread crumbs happy.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC) added text from Module:Citation/doc; 23:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

How might disambiguation work? The script error is probably better than a confusing Lua error. We can hard redirect to Module:Citation/CS1 if that is a concern, but there are dozens of citation modules including Module:Cite book that should be considered. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 21:49, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I really don't know what you're talking about. Why should we care about disambiguation? Why is the Module:Cite book family of modules a concern for this RfD about Module:Citation?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Restore the old version per Trappist the monk. That seems very significantly more helpful than deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 18:38, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Module:Citation/CS1 as an {{R to subpage}} and {{R from short name}}. Trappist the monk's proposal is certainly better than the current situation and I support it as my second preference but I don't see why leaving {{#invoke:Citation}} broken is preferred to it being a shortcut to {{#invoke:citation/CS1}}. Nickps (talk) 21:37, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Module:Citation was soft redirected from 20:05, 8 July 2024 – 22:35, 16 August 2024 when the module was deleted. We could go back to that though I'd rather do the hard error message that I advocate above so that we avoid the confusion of invokes of redirected modules in templates. If you want to use Module:Citation/CS1, use Module:Citation/CS1; don't take the roundabout path via Module:Citation. This is not a case where we are making life easier because there are lots of things invoking Module:Citation; there are none so there is no reason to act as if those invokes exist.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

If we are going to do that route, why not just move Module:Citation/CS1 to Module:Citation and call it a day? Module:Citation/CS2 is barely used. In fact, I probably will TfD CS2 as mostly unused and redundant with Module:Citation/CS1. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 14:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Yep, I TfD'd it: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2025_March_17#Module:Citation/CS2 Aasim (話す（はなす）) 14:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I gave reasons why we should not move Module:Citation/CS1 → Module:Citation in the previous discussion. Acknowledge that Module:Citation/CS1 is an oddball and leave it be.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per previous discussion at TFD. Izno (talk) 22:41, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Restore the glaring red error message version or Delete per the previous TfD? Retarget to CS1 or Disambiguate per the page drafted at the redirect? The mentioned TfD for CS2 was withdrawn.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:35, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per the previous TfD. The module was history merged, and that is how it is retained. It is not retained at "Module:Citation".—Alalch E. 16:55, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

• On another thought, could we potentially redirect to Module:Cite (and change the content model back to Scribunto)? Aasim (話す（はなす）) 17:41, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have left a notice at the relevant talk page (Module:Citation's redirects to Help talk:Citation style 2). Let's try one more time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:19, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom Supertian8 (talk) 15:40, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete per TfD where it was deleted. This is an exact WP:G4. Gonnym (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Restore the old version per Trappist the monk. Optimal outcome. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

St. Sebastiao

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine

• Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine → Atlantic hurricane season  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

More than one "Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine" since 2017. Has been used in 2020 and 2024 A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

• @A1Cafel: what is the relevance of 2017 to this redirect? Thryduulf (talk) 11:48, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Not much, just a basic info of Potential Tropical Cyclone. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:39, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
  • @Thryduulf: Seems designation was introduced then. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:35, 29 April 2025 (UTC).
    

This isn't going to a specific yearly season anymore, it was retargeted to the generalized non-numbered season article. It originally went to 2024 before being retargeted to Hurricane Helene before the lack of a year disambiguator brought it to its current page. Departure– (talk) 14:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. Ambiguous title. Should've been suppressed when it was moved to Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine (2024) back in September. CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:28, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I failed to !vote initially but I'd vote either keep or retarget to Tropical cyclone naming. This originally did redirect to 2024 Atlantic hurricane season but now it redirects to the vague general Atlantic hurricane season article so for all I care it's moot without a year disambiguator. Departure– (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

@Departure–: It's moot without a year disambiguator. No, it isn't. The lack of disambiguator only makes this more confusing, since the term "Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine" is used every single year, so we don't want readers getting confused. The term isn't even mentioned at target anyway (nor anywhere else for that matter). CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:16, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, hopelessly vague. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:42, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

• Either Delete or DABify - There have been several Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine's in history. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 20:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
• I would retarget to Glossary_of_tropical_cyclone_terms#P which is where Potential tropical cyclone targets. Any other ambiguous potential tropical cyclone redirects could point here too. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:30, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

But there's no mention of a "Potential Tropical Cyclone Nine" there either. Why are you proposing to retarget this to a page where it isn't mentioned? CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

If we're not going to have a list of PTC Nines, it lets readers see what a Potential Tropical Cyclone is; I don't think it needs to mention every number ever used for a PTC, though the final sentence of These systems are designated as "Potential Tropical Cyclones" could potentially be worded to indicate that they are numbered. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 19:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per Skarmory, or dabify. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:30, 29 April 2025 (UTC).
  

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Various draftspace redirects

• Draft:Buttercup → Jack Stauber  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Chicken Jockey (quote) → A Minecraft Movie#"Chicken jockey" TikTok trend  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Fire in the hole! → Geometry Dash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Happy ghast → Minecraft#The Nether  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:I've played these games before! → Squid Game season 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Libet's Delay → The Caretaker (musician)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Lobotomy Dash → Geometry Dash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Pixel Peeker Polka → Kevin MacLeod  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Superman 'Starman' → Starman (song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Three-point-one-four-one-five-nine → Pi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Draft:Two steps ahead → Nikocado Avocado  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete all. These unnecessary draftspace redirects do not appear to have a clear purpose. They have always existed as redirects rather than actual drafts, and almost no pages link to them. I don't think that there is a single reason to keep them. Xoontor (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. GSK (talk • edits) 15:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - whilst I'm sure there is a good reason somewhere to have a redirect in draft space to main, I can't think of one. These certainly aren't suitable uses.

Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:36, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Well, there's WP:RDRAFT, but that's only for redirects left behind as the result of page moves (not applicable here). jlwoodwa (talk) 02:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Many of these redirects were created as a result of page moves from draftspace to mainspace, so technically, WP:RDRAFT applies, but it's a bit more complicated. WP:DRAFT states: Drafts are pages in the Draft namespace (draftspace) where new articles can be created and developed for a limited period of time.. It doesn't mention anything about drafting redirects, which is what primarily happened here. I am not even sure if drafting redirects like this is allowed (if it is, it should probably be mentioned in WP:DRAFT). Even though WP:RDRAFT applies to some of these redirects, we can always ignore all rules. Xoontor (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep those that originated from moves. About those created as redirects in the first place, in draftspace (haven't checked, but the nominator says that there are such cases): If someone really created Draft:X, a redirect to Y, and moved Draft:X to X, and now both Draft:X and X redirect to Y, that's not worthy of having a discussion. It's not one of the reasons to delete redirect.—Alalch E. 22:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Office hours

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 16#Office hours

El mahdi Mohammad Senosi

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 17#El mahdi Mohammad Senosi

Mega Man II

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 18#Mega Man II

Varian Carty

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Presidental

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 9#Presidental

Pope John XXIV

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

San Diego, United States

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disability-related articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disability-related articles

Enemies list

• Enemies list → Nixon's Enemies List  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Enemies List → Nixon's Enemies List  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Although Nixon's enemies list was perhaps the most famous, the general concept is much broader than one person. BD2412 T 01:51, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• My first thought was disambiguation, with the current target and Enemy of the people. When searching for others I discovered that we have many comic book lists along the lines of List of Aquaman enemies, List of Batman family enemies, etc, that all seem to be covered at Lists of villains. I'm not sure whether slightly broadening that page or creating a new disambiguation page at this title, Lists of enemies or Enemies lists and linking them as see-alsos would be better? Thryduulf (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Thryduulf: I'd wager that moving List of villains to either Lists of enemies and villians or Lists of villains and enemies would be a good call here, given a synonymous relationship between the words "enemy" and "villain" cannot be assumed. Steel1943 (talk) 23:05, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• I could imagine making it a disambiguation but the term as such—"enemies list", not "list of enemies"—is almost always a direct or indirect allusion to Nixon's. (If anyone wants anything from me beyond this one remark, please ping me: I don't maintain a watchlist on en-wiki.) Jmabel | Talk 02:08, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
  • I was recently hit up about this on my talk page, and I stand by my original remark. See, for example, https://politicaldictionary.com/words/enemies-list/, https://www.history.com/articles/richard-nixon-enemies-list-who-was-on-it. Question to those who say this term should be treated as more generic: is there any indication of the term being used prior to Nixon? - Jmabel | Talk 17:56, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Comment. In a good amount of fictional media, the phrase "enemies list" is synonymous with Bestiary. Steel1943 (talk) 22:59, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of villains (or wherever the aforementioned titled redirects to when this discussion is closed). The article may need to be updated to include the current target of the nominated redirect, but either way, the current material of List of villains seems like the appropriate target for this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:07, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

  Totally meh at this point per the comments following this one. Any other comments I've made in this discussion still apply. Steel1943 (talk) 16:23, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, given the varied responses without clear target. Personally, my first thought the enemies list TV trope. The first page of Google search results included Enemies List Home Recording, Kash Patel's enemies list (NYT), Trump's enemies list (Independent), Nixon's Enemies List, and Rick Wilson's The Enemies List podcast. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Given that the podcast is mentioned in Rick Wilson (political consultant), I now do think that there is sufficient content to disambiguate. I would add Rogues' gallery, if that was expanded to touch on the concept in fiction. BD2412 T 02:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
• delete per the however many different definitions of "enemy". it doesn't necessarily mean "villain" or even "antagonist", and definitions can vary based on extremely fickle variables. for an example i'm pretty sure most people would understand, some could consider king dedede an "enemy", but even ignoring how he's friend-shaped (i will hear no arguments to the contrary), his enmity with kirbo (or with anyone else for that matter) has been a matter of perspective or a misunderstanding at best since the second game. i oppose a dab for the same reason, since then "enemy" could just refer to anything in any context that opposes anything under any perspective we can see something in (give or take this caveat, even) for any reason in any way consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 11:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Significa liberdade and consarn; this term has myriad possible definitions, there is no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and it's too ambiguous to target any particular article. I suggest that a WP:DAB page is a good idea in the long term, but in the meantime, WP:REDYES and WP:WTAF apply. Carguychris (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. An enemies list is a common subject in fiction and real life (as far back as The Mikado's "As someday it may happen"), and thus a redirect to just one of them is counterproductive. -insert valid name here- (talk) 19:37, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note I've added the capitalised Enemies List redirect to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 22:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
• Drafted a list of lists at Draft:Lists of enemies and villains to which I propose retargetting both this redirect and Lists of villains. Thryduulf (talk) 22:42, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: I would say that Enemies list and Enemies List are separate concepts from List(s) of enemies. As such, I would disagree with redirecting the first two to the latter. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

• @BD2412, Steel1943, Consarn, Carguychris, and -insert valid name here-: Pinging participants to notify the listing of the capitalized Enemies List. Jay 💬 16:21, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

  same case, if it needs to be said consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 16:23, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

  I have drafted a potential disambiguation page for the specific phrase, "Enemies list", under the current redirect. BD2412 T 17:32, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

  I don't understand the separation of "enemies list" and "list of enemies" and consider this dab to be significantly inferior to the one I drafted. Thryduulf (talk) 00:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

  @Thryduulf: There are three things in the encyclopedia specifically titled "Enemies list", with or without internal capitalization. I don't think the podcast is a proper subset of a "list of enemies", because despite its name being derived from that, it is not merely a literal listing of enemies. At the least, in your page the podcast should be in the hatnote rather than the body. Otherwise, a disambiguation page should exist (albeit, possibly at Enemies list (disambiguation), with the current redirects pointing to your list as the primary topic). BD2412 T 00:19, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

  @BD2412 I'm not sure I understand your comment (this is probably on me as I feel like I should understand it), could you try rephrasing. Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

  I mean that we should have separate pages for the concept of a set list of enemies or villains, and for disambiguation of unrelated meanings of the phrase "enemies list". BD2412 T 16:04, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Enemies List per WP:SMALLDIFFERENCES but delete the first one due to unresolveable ambiguity. Cremastra _talk 18:32, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: any more thoughts on the capitalized version or the dab?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:56, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• I like the DAB, though given all three entries on it are capitalized, it should probably be at Enemies List with the sentence case version redirecting there. I am also fine with keeping the redirect to Nixon's list. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as the primary topic, but I would not be opposed to adding Lists of villains to the hatnote. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:59, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's try one more time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 17:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• I have used BD2412's drafted dab and moved it to Enemies List per Skarmory. I also made Nixon's list the primary. Jay 💬 16:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Stupid dog

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Sexual Anomalies

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Sexual Anomalies

Theory of Gender Neutrality

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Needs of the Many

• The Needs of the Many → Heroes Reborn (miniseries)#ep4  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This phrase could also refer to other things besides the current target. Suggested action: Retarget or Disambiguate. Oreocooke (talk) 05:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate with what? Give examples. Gonnym (talk) 05:51, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

  Examples: the series it's from (if applicable), the character that said it, the specific episode (if in a series), &c. (note multiple series being implied) Oreocooke (talk) 15:26, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

  I'm sure the character said "The needs of the many" and not "The Needs of the Many". Oppose so far as there aren't any other articles other than this episode with this exact title. Gonnym (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

  That makes sense. Oreocooke (talk) 18:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy keep for now, as no new target or dab entries were actually suggested. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:00, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

  That's on me for forgetting to give sources. I believe Star Trek II may be a good idea in addition to anything else I've provided or will provide. Oreocooke (talk) 15:31, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

• Pinging @Oreocooke. Plant🌱man (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
• New idea: Keep, and make a separate disambiguation. Oreocooke (talk) 18:07, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

  Pinging @Gonnym. Oreocooke (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RanDom 404 (talk) 23:38, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Spock § Cultural impact, where the phrase "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" is mentioned. It's a quote from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, also mentioned at Wikiquote. I found several songs and TV/podcast episodes and a licensed tie-in novel Star Trek Online: The Needs of the Many that currently have no mention on en.Wikipedia, and I added the redirect "The Needs of the Many" (The Bill) and The Needs of the Many (disambiguation). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradoctor (talk • contribs) 02:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

  guess I don't need my dab draft anymore, you handled this great. Oreocooke (talk) 05:02, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

• Pinging @Gonnym (again). Oreocooke (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the newly suggested target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Comment: hopefully consensus actually happens this time. Oreocooke (talk) 04:45, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I still oppose. The character never said "The Needs of the Many" with a capital "Needs" and a capital "Many". Gonnym (talk) 09:52, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

What about WP:DIFFCAPS? It seems clear that the quote is the primary topic here. Paradoctor (talk) 13:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A third relist because of less participation numbers. Despite the back-and-forth, there have been only two voters (discounting the blocked IP). Is Spock's quote the primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate a la the new page, which should be at the base title, since I doubt either of these is primary. I'm mildly opposed to including the quote there, since it's only like half of it, but I don't really care all that much. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:29, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  The qoute is the primary usage as all the other usages descend from it, but that being said, I'd be fine with having the dab page at the base title. Paradoctor (talk) 22:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  i would also be fine with that Oreocooke (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

• @Jay Isn't that the whole reason this started? because spock would be less ASTONISHing? Oreocooke (talk) 15:53, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• {{dabr}} * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:12, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  Uhh... The Needs of the Many (disambiguation) Paradoctor (talk) 21:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

  Whoops, not sure how I missed that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Yuanshuo era

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Falsterbo Horse Show

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Moot now an article

Moving contact lubricant

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Moving contact lubricant

Automatic lubricating cup

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Automatic lubricating cup

River House Records

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Asian Library

• Asian Library → University of British Columbia Library#Asian Library  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Created by a very recent merge. There are several possible targets in addition to the UBC Library, however. These include East Asian Library and the Gest Collection, C.V. Starr East Asian Library, and Harvard–Yenching Library, among others. A disambiguation page may be in order. Cnilep (talk) 02:11, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

• As the merger, if consensus can be reached on suitable entries, no problem with disambiguation. it's lio! | talk | work 02:18, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

• I have no objections to a disambiguation page. I agree that Asian Library is quite broad as a term. Cyali (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Disambig in addition to the above, there is also Cheng Yu Tung East Asian Library and Washington University Libraries#Specialist libraries. If a dab is created, East Asian library should be created as a redirect to it. Thryduulf (talk) 10:31, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. The "L" is capitalized, showing that this is being used as a proper name; and while there are indeed other generic "Asian libraries", the UBC example appears to be the only one actually titled "the Asian Library". I'd have thought, therefore, that the redirect should be left as it is; but that dab pages should be created for "Asian library" and "East Asian Library". GrindtXX (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:49, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Grind. Jay 💬 10:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation seems like the most reasonable approach here. Not convinced by above argument that the title is indeed distinct enough to clearly only refer to the one subject. The dab page should be made regardless of outcome, but I personally don't see what would make the current target the primary topic. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 05:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Bianca de Vera

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Bianca de Vera

May 6

Durre Menthor

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Main Article

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 17#Main Article

Electrism

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

I'm not sure whether "electrism" is a real word; google search gives me a random mix of stuff, which suggests it isn't. Maybe delete? Duckmather (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• I have not heard this word in any context. Constant314 (talk) 04:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
• Delete The only significant thing that comes up is a Huffington Post article about Carmen Electrism, relating to Carmen Electra. There's no use of that term anywhere else, though, so that redirect target also doesn't work. Based5290 :3 (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep! A Google Books search comes up with numerous pieces of evidence, for instances this that this is in fact a real, if perhaps archaic, word, whose meaning is 'electricity'. JayCubby 02:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

  @JayCubby: Good catch! Consider my initial nomination struck then. Duckmather (talk) 19:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

  As best as I can tell, this seems to be the ramblings of a crackpot, and it's unclear that "electrism" is even talking about electricity as it's normally understood, and not some related crackpottish idea. As I noted below, I'm unable to even find this term in the OED. It's unlikely that anyone is going to search for this, let alone that they're merely looking for the general topic of electricity if they are. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

  Yeah, I just double checked, and a search in this book finds 31 matches for "electricity" vs. 18 for "electrism", so it's quite unlikely that the author actually means for "electrism" to refer to the same thing. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per JayCubby. Thryduulf (talk) 12:50, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as, at best, an obscure, archaic term that's not (nor should be) mentioned at the target. I don't even see it listed at the OED. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  I have decided to add a sourced mention to the section Etymology of electricity#Electrism instead of at the main Electricity article (as the latter has a hatnote to the article Etymology of electricity, which includes the former). Duckmather (talk) 03:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Etymology of electricity § Electrism per the nom's addition. @Duckmather: By "worka" did you mean "works"? Jay 💬 13:19, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

  Duckmather corrected the "worka" typo. Jay 💬 18:18, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Zldksnflqmtm

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Googlovic

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Squidward on a Chair

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Syriacs

• Syriacs → Assyrian people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Proposing a new retarget to Terms for Syriac Christians, as the reasoning is outlined in the proposed target article: "Syriac Christians of Near-Eastern (Semitic) origin use several terms for their self-designation. In alphabetical order, the main terms are: Arameans, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Phoenicians, and Syriacs." This indicates that the term is not solely associated with Assyrians. Academically, Syriac and Assyrian are distinguished, with Syriac often used as a synonym for Aramean. Syriac functions both as an exonym and an endonym for Aramean Christians. For reference, see this source, which states: "genocide of the Assyrians, Syriacs, and Chaldeans." Until a modern Aramean people article is established, this redirect would be more fitting with Terms for Syriac Christians as the target. Note: I was unable to place the RfD notice on the redirect page; if someone could do so, it would be appreciated.--Wlaak (talk) 09:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep as is - Today, the modern Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac group is covered at "Assyrian people" and is named so per WP:COMMONNAME. Modern scholars consider them to be the same ethnic group. The disamb page would also be a better alternative than the proposed target article. Shmayo (talk) 14:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Common name or not, Syriac is used to refer to multiple groups, not exclusively Assyrians. Terms for Syriac Christians speaks of this term being applied to various people, it is the most fitting one. Modern scholars do not apply "Syriac" to "Assyrian", they keep them separate, hence often speaking of Syriac/Chaldean/Assyrian, as the source I referenced. Keeping as is, would according to me, seem to be WP:POV, to only limit it to the Assyrian people and not the broader Syriac Christians which Terms for Syriac Christians is for and speaks of. Wlaak (talk) 19:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Wlaak, I have previously listed several historical quotes and sources under the Gungoren village talk page but here are also some sources from our own community and church in which we identify ourselves as Aramean and not as Assyrian.

- "Syriac is a Greek derivative term for Aramean, which was widely used after the conquests of Alexander the Great."

https://www.wca-ngo.org/heritage/102-people

- "The Holy Synod of the Syriac Orthodox Church declared in 1983 that the Syriac language is in fact Aramaic, and the Syrians are Arameans."

https://www.wca-ngo.org/our-heritage

- "Syriac Orthodox Christians often identify as Arameans, tracing their heritage back to the ancient Aramean kingdoms and preserving their language and traditions."

https://www.academia.edu/5159897/Ethnicity_Ethnogenesis_and_the_Identity_of_Syriac_Orthodox_Christians

- "The term 'Syriac' is derived from the Greek word 'Syrian', which itself is a translation of 'Aramean'."

https://www.wca-ngo.org/heritage/102-people 145.222.94.129 (talk) 09:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep as is - For some reason I don't have the ability to directly reply to the first comment so I will leave my comment under Shmayo. The people who call themselves Syriac are the same as those who call themselves Assyrian. Per WP:COMMONNAME, this is also what is used to identify the community. Terms for Syriac Christians discusses the various...well, terms used by them and other groups who follow the Syriac rite of churches, so it's not really fitting to redirect it there.

By the way @Wlaak, the Dutch IP 145.222.94.129 was the subject of a sockpuppetry investigation only last September [15] for disrupting Güngören, Midyat in favor of Aramean identity. They are absolutely not fit to take part in this discussion based on that alone, and seeing them write:

"The only group that calls itself Assyrians are the Iraqi Nestorians and some Chaldeans. You are talking nonsense and no one from our community supports your illusion."

...is extremely telling here. Surayeproject3 (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Do not talk to me about who is fit and not fit to be participating, I am my own. Talk to him about it. I called out his manners already. Wlaak (talk) 14:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Well you are both discussing on that article's talk page how to find sources to change the name of the villagers to Aramean, and you mentioned the redirect to Terms for Syriac Christians in one of your responses. It was just my inference. Surayeproject3 (talk) 14:34, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

No we weren't. IP asked how we could change the redirect, I told him if he wishes to do so, there is a open discussion for it and linked it. I said if you have sources that do indeed tell that the village is Aramean, then it can be changed, if there isn't, it remains as what the sources say. Wlaak (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep as is - the terms "Syriac" and "Assyrian" refer to the same group of people. However, "Assyrian" is the common name. Terms for Syriac Christians is an explanation of the different terms, not an article about the people per se. Mugsalot (talk) 07:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

There is almost no one in our Syriac Orthodox community who identifies as Assyrian. You are talking nonsense here to suppress your illusion of a great Assyrian people. Our people and church have massively stated that we are descended from the ancient Arameans. The only group that calls itself Assyrians are the Iraqi Nestorians and some Chaldeans. You are talking nonsense and no one from our community supports your illusion. 145.222.94.129 (talk) 08:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Relax mate Wlaak (talk) 10:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Sorry mate but both Shmayo and Mugsalot have been blocking everything for years now and every change we make they change it back to their Assyrian ideology. It is very frustrating and my limit was that they would change my village. However, they have filled in everything that has to do with 'Arameans' as if they are extinct. An example is the page "Tur-Abdin". That is our home area where all Syriac Orthodox Christians come from. This area has nothing to do with the Assyrian identity. I would very much appreciate it if something would be done about this once and for all. Also on the page "Arameans" they constantly try to remove all links that have to do with the Syriacs and add parts as if we no longer exist. It all has to fit in their own Assyrian street. 145.222.94.129 (talk) 11:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

It may be the common name, but it is no exclusive to Assyrians, that's the point. In academics, the terms are often differentiated, with Syriac often equated to Aramean. Today, the article that speaks of all groups is Terms for Syriac Christians, it includes the Arameans, Chaldeans, and the Assyrians. Assyrian people writes three sentences of Arameans, neither does it write of the correleation between the Syriac name to these three different names. It is also only the Assyrian name being "prevailed". Wlaak (talk) 10:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Support retarget - not exclusively Assyrian per Terms of Syriac Christians Historynerd361 (talk) 11:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Support, I agree with the proposal. The term "Syriac" is not exclusively synonymous with "Assyrian" and is often used in broader contexts that include Aramean and Chaldean identities as well. As noted in the target article, several groups of Near-Eastern (Semitic) origin—Arameans, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Arameans use "Syriac" as a self-designation. The academic distinction between Syriac and Assyrian, along with the usage of Syriac as both an exonym and endonym for Aramean Christians, supports redirecting to the more inclusive "Terms for Syriac Christians" rather than a narrower ethnic designation. Until a dedicated article on modern Arameans exists, this redirect better reflects the current scholarship and self-identifications! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kivercik (talk • contribs) 15:32, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Comment: @Wlaak: I have tagged the redirect. For future reference, please see WP:RFDHOWTO regarding how to tag redirects with the {{Rfd}} template ... since this edit of yours does not seem like the resulting template usage per the instructions listed at WP:RFDHOWTO. Steel1943 (talk) 22:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

thank you! Wlaak (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget as nominator. Wlaak (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget. "Syriac(s)" should not be treated as a synonym of "Assyrian(s)". Syriac is primarily a linguistic term. Its use an ethnic term (as opposed to 'Syrian') is relatively recent . Srnec (talk) 17:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget

Not a single source claim Assyrians to be the lone representatives for Syriacs. Therefore this is a strongly misguiding feature and thus, a more adept retarget would be Terms for Syriac Christians. 777network (talk) 22:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Karyolysus lacerate

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Auto-asphyxiate

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Blae

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Wikipedia:TAG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

May 5

Benching

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sans song

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Infinite Frameworks

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Moot Page is no longer a redirect

Four Fiends

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

North Bangkok University

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Talk:Avoidant personality disorder/Archive 9

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

Chyrhyryn Soviet Republic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 13#Chyrhyryn Soviet Republic

Trioxin

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

DYRG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: restore and AfD

Discover World

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kdam Eurovision 2018

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dei

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

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 November 21 § Dei – keep

Recently, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has become more talked about, especially with Donald Trump as President again. People typing "dei" are almost certainly searching for DEI rather than the Latin word for god. Mast303 (talk) 17:58, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. The initialism is spelled in all caps, but the Latin word for god is not. That is enough of a difference to distinguish these topics. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:21, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Diversity, equity, and inclusion - Dei (disambiguation) and that page are the two top outgoing links from Deus [16] and the article is top outbound link from the dab page[17] (Dues is third). Every hit on the first three pages of Google results for "dei" -Wikipedia is also about diversity, equity, and inclusion - whichever way you look at it there is a clear primary topic and it is not where we are currently sending readers. Thryduulf (talk) 18:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Google is not caps sensitive so it's a poor way to determine a primary topic, especially in a WP:DIFFCAPS scenario. Google results also skew towards recent events, which is counter to WP:PT2 and WP:RECENTISM. Dei being a Latin topic is very much in the opposite direction in regards to long-term significance. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:34, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Google was only one part of my rationale, and while diffcaps is relevant it is not the whole story. I can find no evidence that points towards the current target being primary, but lots of evidence from multiple sources that the diversity meaning is. If you have any evidence that contradicts this, please present it and I'll reconsider. Thryduulf (talk) 19:02, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• Move Dei (disambiguation) to Dei since someone could reasonably be looking for either target when not typing an all-caps acronym. Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

  Dei (disambiguation) should be moved to DEI (disambiguation) because most entries there are initialisms. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:40, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

  I have no opinion on that at the moment (I mean, WP:DABNAME states the word is preferred, and Wiktionary:dei exists) ... but if that happens, "retarget to the disambiguation page (whatever its name)" would be my vote. Steel1943 (talk) 22:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

  I was not aware of that guidance at WP:DABNAME. I withdraw that opinion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

  This is not RM; this is RFD. Mast303 (talk) 22:54, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

  Doesn't matter: a "retarget to Dei (disambiguation)" result would end with "move Dei (disambiguation) to Dei" anyways per WP:DABNAME/WP:MALPLACED. So please, find something better to do than being pedantic. Thanks. Steel1943 (talk) 00:22, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Diversity, equity, and inclusion has become more talked out, especially with the Black Lives Matter movement and Trump's efforts to remove DEI. Therefore, most people searching for Dei are probably searching for diversity, equity, and inclusion. Mast303 (talk) 22:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as is. The plural for 'god' is a reasonably important word by itself, and has been for a very, very long time, where as the acronym "DEI" is very recent, and may not be particularly noteworthy for a long time—not because the concept is necessarily of little importance, but because sociological terminology tends to be very unstable, and the current political environment is likely to make it even more so. But "DEI" is distinguishable because of its form, and hatnotes are sufficient to distinguish them for Wikipedia. I'm also not sure that "DEI" is widely used throughout the English-speaking world, or whether it's primarily used in the United States. Either way, its current popularity as a topic title is very recent and likely to be short-lived. P Aculeius (talk) 10:24, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to the disambiguation page. I don't think either the Latin word or the diversity acronym can be described as the clear primary topic, and I think readers would be best served by redirecting straight to the disambiguation page, putting both topics on equal footing. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS ("small details are often sufficient to distinguish topics") and WP:PLURALPT ("the normal situation is that a plural redirects to its singular"). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Overwrite with the disambiguation page -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as is Per WP:DIFFCAPS policy. DEI should no go to the same place. But people need to learn to use the Shift key. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:34, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to diversity, equity, and inclusion WP:PRIMARYTOPIC applies here. Although people often mistaking for write an acronym "DEI" in more usual style such as "Dei" and "dei" (all-lowercase), it does not negate the status of "diversity, equity, and inclusion" as a primary topic for the acronym "Dei" (not all-caps DEI). 2404:8000:1037:587:3168:5857:B7AD:816D (talk) 10:04, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Dei (disambiguation). The "diversity, equality and inclusion" topic is much more common, but it's always spelled in all caps, so it's not the primary topic for "Dei" (not in all caps). However there's still a good chance that someone typing in "Dei" is looking for diversity/equality/inclusion (or some other term abbreviated as DEI), rather than the Latin word for god. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 00:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

• I just listed the previous RfD from 2019. Jay 💬 20:06, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per all, and per my vote at the (ongoing) boq RfD. The disambig page is overwhelmingly for the uppercase DEI, and the disambig page's lowercase title could be a consequence of the WP:DABNAME that Steel mentioned. I need to see if we can IAR and move it to the uppercase as Tavix initially suggested. Jay 💬 20:20, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:MN

• Wikipedia:MN → Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:MN pointed to Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Noticeboard from 2006 to 2018. It was then redirected to Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles and currently points there. It has received about 1200 pageviews since 2018. Editors from Wikipedia:WikiProject Minnesota have requested that the shortcut point to that project as MN is the standard abbreviation for the state. A discussion at the notability guideline's talkpage did not find consensus. gobonobo ^{+ c} 21:20, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per my comments in the linked discussion - Shortcuts being ambiguous is very common and not a problem. What is a problem is retargetting well-used shortcuts as this just causes confusion when one person refers to it (not necessarily linked) expecting it to still target the original location (how often do you check the targets of shortcuts you use frequently) at the same time as others refer to it expecting it to point at the new location. Editing long-closed discussions to change the target of redirects like this is disruptive makework. The incomming links for this redirect I spot check all clearly intend the current location. Deletion would just break things for no benefit to anybody. Thryduulf (talk) 21:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Wikipedia:WikiProject Minnesota as a short and logical shortcut to a project that needs one. I'm not buying an argument that it's a sensible shortcut for the current target. When referring to notability, the N comes first, not last (eg: WP:NBAND, WP:NALBUM). Employing a hatnote (especially with an explanatory note that it was the previous target) would resolve any confusion for anyone following old music-related links. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep – This has been used as a shortcut to WP:MUSICBIO etc. in discussions and presumably in edit summaries for many years now. What Thryduulf said. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:49, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate due to being old, and this most likely has excessive edit summary linking, which cannot be changed. I do sympathize with the nominator, but it seems this is now the best solution. Steel1943 (talk) 04:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget or Disambiguate – "NY" goes to the WikiProject New York (state). I do not see any reason for MN not to redirect to WikiProject Minnesota. The Minnesota User Group is trying to rekindle interest and develop new projects after going dark after COVID-19. This means rebuilding the infrastructure and making finding resources on Wikipedia for Minnesotans and those wishing to help on Minnesota topics more straightforward.
  

As per my original comments: The original link was created in 2006 to redirect to "WikiProject Music/Noticeboard" which is currently inactive. A redirect to "MN" made sense for "Music/Noticeboard." It makes little sense to for WP:MN to go to "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" it appears someone just coopted it. As @Pingnova pointed out the section already has three shortcuts and WP:MN is not listed as one of them supporting the idea that it was just taken.

It is important to point out that the shortcut WP:MN has been used only 96 times since 2006. However the shortcuts WP:BAND, WP:MUSICBIO, & WP:SINGER each has been used thousands of times. The comment that MN is a "well-used shortcut" does not play out according to the evidence. Keeping a "MN" as short link "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" appears to be nothing more than link hoarding or pride. If it is a case of the latter then remove it from "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" and send to a Disambiguate page, so then no one will be happy. Myotus (talk) 03:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget - I believe this should be retargeted to Wikiproject Minnesota due to its relatively few uses and we could simply change the link in places it is used because of how infrequently it is used. Especially as it isn’t even listed as a link to that section in the section itself. Lastly Minnesota is very frequently abbreviated to MN and this is the first time musicians has been abbreviated to it. Macaw* 16:57, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

  Additionally add a hat note mentioning the former redirect Macaw* 17:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate WP:Minnesota will never be a sought out target. No U.S. State wikiproject should occupy 2-letter abbreviation shortcuts, since they are all moribund, and it would not be a very useful use of such a prominent short redirect. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

  I see your point but other state wikiprojects have two letter links such as WP:NY and the criteria for musicians is rarly linked to with WP:MN compared to it's other shortcuts and a hat note would solve any issues that disambiguation would solve. Macaw* 02:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  User:65.92.246.77 (aka: anonymous), "Minnesota will never be a sought out target." It is rather insulting to hear such bias. We will move our state to the coast so folks will seek us out.
  The following US States use 2-letter abbreviation shortcuts in the English Wikipedia version.

  • WP:AK - Wikipedia:WikiProject Alaska
  • WP:AZ - Wikipedia:WikiProject Arizona
  • WP:IL - Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois
  • WP:KY - Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky
  • WP:MI - Wikipedia:WikiProject Michigan
  • WP:MS - Wikipedia:WikiProject Mississippi
  • WP:MO - Wikipedia:WikiProject Missouri
  • WP:NH - Wikipedia:WikiProject New_Hampshire
  • WP:NJ - Wikipedia:WikiProject New_Jersey
  • WP:NY - Wikipedia:WikiProject New_York_(state)
  • WP:OH - Wikipedia:WikiProject Ohio
  • WP:OK - Wikipedia:WikiProject Oklahoma
  • WP:TN - Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee

  If two letter codes are too valuable to assign to US states and need to be held in limbo just in case they might need to be assigned in a possible redirect in the English Wikipedia version for some unknown future use then we need to pull these State codes too. Myotus (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Weak disambiguate (or keep as second choice) as retargeting seems like it would disrupt a lot of links. I've drafted the dab page. Duckmather (talk) 19:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  Yeah but this rediret is only used 96 times and the disruption could be solved with intuition when you get sent to a irrelivent page to the topic you were just in and a hatnote. Macaw* 21:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  @Macaw:, yes, possibly 96 times in links in pages and articles, but there could be links in edit summaries that are not included in count. Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

  Could be? Please do the work to support your statement. If not, then the redirect is only used 96 times. It is frustrating when the people making the arguments against retargeting do not back up their statements with evidence. Myotus (talk) 02:17, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Wikipedia:WikiProject Minnesota. I prefer to err on the side of preserving shortcuts, but in this case, there doesn't seem to be a need for WP:MN to point to Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. It isn't a commonly known or used shortcut, and the few instances of its most recent use (since 2018 when its original target was deprecated) can largely be corrected. This type of shortcut is intuitive and common for many regional WikiProjects. gobonobo ^{+ c} 01:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose disambiguation. Projectspace shortcuts are generally ambiguous by nature. It is only appropriate to disambiguate them in rare or special cases, a bar which this does not seem to quite meet. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 05:33, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

  How so? Please support opinions and statements with evidence. Myotus (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Postgaardida

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

According to the article on Postgaardia, Postgaardida is not monotypic and has more than 1 genus (Postgaardi and Calkinsia). Alfa-ketosav (talk) 07:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Additional notes: A 2020 study also mentions Calkinsia as part of Postgaardida: Kolisko M, Flegontova O, Karnkowska A, Lax G, Maritz JM, Pánek T, Táborský P, Carlton JM, Čepička I, Aleš H, Julius L, Simpson AG, Tai V (2020). "EukRef-excavates: seven curated SSU ribosomal RNA gene databases". Database. 2020 (baaa080). doi:10.1093/database/baaa080. PMC 7678783. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 08:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

What would you like to be done with this redirect? Jay 💬 08:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I would like to either turn it into an article or delete it (sorry, I don't want to turn it into an extremely short stub like many of the articles about protistology, e. g. Vahlkampfiidae or Trichomonadidae only contains a sentence about where it belongs, a list of genera, a list of related articles, a reference list and a list of further reading, but no (or a minimal amount of) more details; articles like these are called substubs in my main WP). Other articles merely contain a taxobox, the sentence "X is a Y in Z" with 1 reference, where X is the name of the clade, Y the name of the taxonomic rank, Z the name of the group containing X. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 08:37, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• retarget to Postgaardia where a sublist for it exists -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Kunal Singh Rathore

• Kunal Singh Rathore → List of 2023 Indian Premier League personnel changes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a suitable target; The page does not describe much about the player. Vestrian24Bio 03:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Keep "Not much" is a good target unless there is a better one. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:23, 19 April 2025 (UTC).

Keep Wait until has established more notability Servite et contribuere (talk) 11:41, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Retarget: more information about him at Rajasthan Royals#Current squad. The-Pope (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 00:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete (or, I guess, restore and send to AfD if you're someone who thinks that's necessary) in favor of search showing all of the multiple mentions of this person each with too little substance to warrant a redirect rather than arbitrarily choosing one. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:04, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:03, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Restore and AfD per Pppery. Kunal Rathore is mentioned in several articles, and Rajasthan cricket team § Current squad is a better target than the current or suggested targets. There is no best target. Jay 💬 13:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
• Restore. Per [18], it looks like he played a match in the Indian Premier League. That's a credible claim of notability. As always with my restore !votes, I oppose a procedural AfD. It should be left to someone who still wants to pursue deletion and is able to nominate it with a proper rationale. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:45, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Petraseme

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

May 4

Niggerz

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

Historic Palestine

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

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 30 § Historic Palestine – retarget to Palestine (disambiguation)

Following this discussion, the page was redirected to the disambiguation page over the argument that the term might refer to Mandatory Palestine. Well, see the opening at Palestine (region): history starts long before 1920. Retarget to Palestine (region). ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 21:30, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep for the exact same reason it was retargetted here in the last discussion: The term may refer to either topic on the disambiguation page with neither being the clear primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 23:56, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

  You’re missing the point. “Historic Palestine” never refers to Mandatory Palestine per se, nor is the latter term antithetical to the simple wording “Palestine”. Mandatory Palestine is only the final polity to exist in the region of Palestine, or “historic Palestine”, before the establishment of Israel. In other terms, “historic Palestine” refers to the region throughout the centuries, not to a specific point in time. Therefore, it should redirect to Palestine (region), as the lead section of this article clearly shows. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 00:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Thryduulf. It's not explained why Historic Palestine would not refer to Mandatory Palestine, that seems like a very plausible target for this and just as much so as the region and its older history. Neither meaning is primary so keeping as a disambiguation is best.  — Amakuru (talk) 01:25, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

  See my reply to the above vote. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 09:16, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. Based on my searches, this mainly appears to be a vaguely-defined geographic term. I'm not seeing any sources that specifically refer to the polity of Mandatory Palestine using this phrase. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:07, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom and Presidentman 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 04:40, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to History of Palestine, which covers Palestine historically (including the mandate!). -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:43, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

  ...I removed the mandate template from this page as apparently improperly used when on non-article talk pages. Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to History of Palestine per Tavix, as well as the redirect being the closest title match to that target. Steel1943 (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Current target, History of Palestine, or Palestine (region)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:17, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• History of Palestine seems like a reasonable target to me. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to History of Palestine which seems the most appropriate. The current target Palestine (disambiguation) (a) lists only those historic entities that include Palestine in their name, thereby missing out quite a few that don't, and (b) also lists various other articles not related to the region (except in name); the alternative suggestion of Palestine (region) is better, though not limited to history. Rosbif73 (talk) 15:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  But “historic Palestine” is an expression referring to the territory historically identified as “Palestine”, not necessarily to its historical events. Hence why it is literally mentioned as a synonym in the lead of Palestine (region). ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 15:39, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  We can always add a hatnote. Steel1943 (talk) 18:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  That’s for sure, but it’s still a bit weird to me how redirecting to an article literally mentioning “historic Palestine” in bold in the lead is not the most obvious option. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 18:40, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

  ...It seems that what's obvious to some is not obvious to others. That, and the bolding can always be adjusted, as well as it still being valid if the page which it is on is included in a hatnote on another page. Steel1943 (talk) 18:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: there's another redirect, Historical Palestine, which currently redirects to Palestine (region) (where it is mentioned in the hatnote). Whatever decision prevails for the historic redirect should presumably also be applied to the historical one too. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:56, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

  Yep, I’m responsible for the latest changes to that redirect and the hatnote, for the same reasons I have opened this discussion. I’ll obviously be amending that one, too, in accordance with the outcome here. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 12:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to History of Palestine (or its alter ego History of Palestine (region), depending upon the outcome of the move request). Let us see if we cannot form some kind of consistent approach to this question. Of the countries I found, we have Historic Iran redirecting to History of Iran for almost 16 years; Historical China to History of China for 11 years; Historical India to History of India for 7 years; relatively new Historical germany to History of Germany; new Historical Pakistan to History of Pakistan. On the other hand, only Historic syria redirects to Syria (disambiguation) for 12 years instead of History of Syria; relatively new Historic Israel to Land of Israel instead of History of Israel; brand new Historical Armenia goes to Armenian highlands instead of History of Armenia. Havradim leaf a message 23:40, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

  The thing is “historic Palestine” has a pretty defined usage as a name for the geographical region. It makes sense for Historical Germany to redirect to History of Germany because it cannot refer to anything else, as Germany (region) is not an established concept. Historic Israel redirecting to Land of Israel is a good analogy. until 1948, both “Israel” and “Palestine” had a different meaning than they do now, and the modern polities have not emerged in continuity with anything; so marking the name with a “historic” tag has more implications than just the history of two countries which have basically never existed until modern times, both as political concepts and as political entities. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 09:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  I can think of List of historic states of Germany or Pan-Germanism as 2 plausible targets for Historical Germany; Greater India, Indian subcontinent, or Hindustan as targets for Historical India; Greater China as a target for Historical China, and so on. Your argument that *Historic Palestine* is any different from these is not convincing. On the other hand, Historic England and Historic Scotland are well defined entities. Havradim leaf a message 12:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  You didn’t get my argument. “Historic Palestine”, unlike the above phrases, has been used as a meaningful expression with a pretty defined meaning, it’s not a simple juxtaposition of adjective+name that may convey a number of different meanings (which ones is up to the reader to interpret based or the context, like you’re trying to do here). While Historic England and Historic Scotland have nothing to do with this discussion to begin with because they don’t even refer to territories. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 15:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  I'm trying hard to understand what you mean. If you mean to say that *Historic Palestine* is a term that was meant to convey the idea that the area that is roughly analogous to what was previously known as Mandatory Palestine has since been only partially reclaimed by the State of Palestine, with the rest being filled up by a nation with a completely different name (Israel), and that therefore there is a need to connect the rest of the territory with Palestine, I can see why you think that this term is different from the other ones mentioned in my first post. However, it could well be argued that Historical India fits this definition as well, since Pakistan and Bangladesh currently fill up the remainder of what was once the Indian subcontinent (I'm unaware of any designs India may have on Pakistan or Bangladesh proper, but this may be beside the point). And yet, precedent here has still found History of India to be the correct target. I agree with Tavix and Steel1943 that the history articles cover the geographic and political boundaries quite well already, and they are the closest to the redirect linguistically. Fortunately, Palestine (region) is linked on the first line of the history article. I am loathe to doing what sounds to me like needlessly introducing a nationalism dispute to Wikipedia. For the record, I think Historic Israel should be retargeted to History of Israel, for neutrality reasons and consistency with the above points. Havradim leaf a message 18:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  My point was very simple. A region that remained historically cohese for centuries was at one point divided, and since then “Historic Palestine” has been used by scholars to refer to the entire region as historically understood, to avoid using the now politically-charged simpler terming of “Palestine”. I overlooked that India/Pakistan has gone through something similar, but to be fair I’m not as familiar with the history of the Indian subcontinent and the terminological practices adopted in its regard, so I don’t know if the things can be compared. Anyways, my point still stands in contrast with most other cases, where the territories identified as China, Germany etc. still are approximately the same as their historical predecessors, so an expression like “historical Germany” does not carry a geopolitical meaning and cannot be compared to “historic Palestine” (or “historical India” for that matter). ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 19:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

  I disagree with you on Germany and China though. If you read List of historic states of Germany and Pan-Germanism and peruse the maps, one could make the argument that Poland, Russia and Czechia have filled out areas of former iterations of Germany. And the Chinese have their One China policy (regarding the contested status of Taiwan). I don't think it would be fair to give preference on Wikipedia to one nationalistic group over another. Havradim leaf a message 20:36, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

MOGAI and others

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 13#MOGAI and others

Breeing

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus The only consensus to be found here is that Screaming (music)#Deathcore is better than the current target (the same article without a section), which nobody has disagreed with, and hence I'll retarget it there. Aside from that the "restore" and "delete" arguments have similar numbers and both sides have argued with each other at length making no headway, and I see no basis as closer to declare one side or the other right. If they had agreed on one specific outcome, then there would probably have been a consensus to do that, and for discussions with this same disagreement I've defaulted to restore as a bartender's close, but here there's enough support for the status quo that that isn't appropriate. If someone wants to boldly restore the article (and possibly send it to AfD), this close does not bar doing so. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Poor people's rights

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#Poor people's rights

Hot Lava and Chicken

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Heroic Sons and Daughters

• Heroic Sons and Daughters → Children of Troubled Times  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Completing incomplte nomination on behalf of Wheezythewave. The rationale appears to be The two film being linked is not the same. There is not much relevancy, per WP:RFD#DELETE. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:18, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete unless someone can give a convincing reason for keeping. From the Chinese Wikipedia, Heroic Sons and Daughters seems to be the name of a completely different film: see zh:英雄儿女. Pinging LlywelynII, who made some early edits to this redirect and may know what's going on. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:39, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• I just notified of this discussion at the target talk, which has a sourced mention, although that was from 10 years back and I'm unable to get to that source. Jay 💬 13:47, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
• @Jay, the relevant content from that source is Even the current Chinese national anthem comes from the film Heroic Sons and Daughters (风云儿女 1935). The name of this song is March of the Volunteers (义勇军进行曲 1935) composed by Nie Er (Di 2008). This unambiguously refers to the target (our article has patriotic 1935 Chinese film most famous as the origin of "The March of the Volunteers", the national anthem of the People's Republic of China). The original content of this page was a dismabig page, with one entry pointing to the current target Children of Troubled Times and the other to a 1964 film which seems to be the one Mx. Granger linked the zhwiki article for, which doesn't seem to have a corresponding English article. Rusalkii (talk) 01:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks. So we have one source using this title for the 1935 film, but I think the 1964 film (currently a redlink) is the primary topic for this title. That suggests we should disambiguate per WP:PRIMARYRED. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

  Fair enough if Google is showing that the other less important film is the correct PRIMARYTOPIC for the namespace but the current guidance at PRIMARYRED is contradictory, not helpful. As far as the posters here have noted, there isn't a blue link to provide at a dab landing page so any temporary dab just would be deleted by other overzealous editors. The productive options here are for one of y'all to either go ahead and create a stub for the 1964 page or to just leave the redirect where it is and note the other title in a dab header on the 1935 film's page. — LlywelynII 02:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:31, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Assume the good-faith assumption of assuming the assumption of good faith was in good faith

• Wikipedia:Assume the good-faith assumption of assuming the assumption of good faith was in good faith → Wikipedia:Whacking with a wet trout  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:AGFAAAGFGF → Wikipedia:Whacking with a wet trout  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This does not seem to be pertinent to the target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:11, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, humor is allowed in wikispace but at this point it just gets nonsensical. Even back in 2009 when this was created it wasn't mentioned at the target. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 18:13, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as creator; in use in two essays at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Assume_th.   — Jeff G. ツ 19:00, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

  Those are both in "See Also" sections. They can just be removed, and in fact probably will be removed automatically should this RFD close as delete. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 19:07, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Wikipedia:Assume the good-faith assumption of assuming the assumption of good faith was in good faith as one of those super-rare occasions where ... seriously? The redirect is odd/humorous, the target is marked numerous, and ... unless the redirect is somehow determined to be ambiguous, I'm not seeing an issue here. However, with that being said, weak delete Wikipedia:AGFAAAGFGF since using shortcuts to humorous targets may not be the best utilization of a shortcut. Steel1943 (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
• Shrug per Steel1943. It's Wikipedia space and it's not like we're using the title for anything else. Rusalkii (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:17, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete B; delete A—but WP:BJAODNify (maybe I just don't get the humour ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Havradim leaf a message 10:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, unless the humour is justified. What does WHACK have to do with the recursive AGF? When or where should we use this? How are readers of WP:AAAGF or WP:AAGFAAGF who see this in the "See also", and click on it, benefitted? Just trying to figure out if some of us get the joke. Jay 💬 05:22, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. I too don't see the humor, this looks like the recursion was taken a step too far. I also don't see its relevance to the target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:33, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

DXYK

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#DXYK

Creation (Dragonlance)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#Creation (Dragonlance)

PD2

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate

Wubwubwub and Wub wub wub

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#Wubwubwub and Wub wub wub

Fapstinence

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Supercute!

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Six Million Germans (Nakam)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Higer K-group

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Poast

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Penis cola

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

May 3

Robo Rampage

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 15#Robo Rampage

Canyon Shooter 2

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

Scribble (the game)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dancing Bush

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#Dancing Bush

Spineworld

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Highwind

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Xena: Warrior Princess (album, Volume NUMBER)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Gender and Sexual Minorities

• Gender and Sexual Minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender and Sexual Minority → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender and/or Sexual Minority → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender and/or Sexual Minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender and/or sexual minority → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender, sexual and romantic minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sexual and gender minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender, Sexual and Romantic Minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender, Sexual and Romantic Minority → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sexual and Gender Minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sexual and gender minority → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender and sexual minorities → LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Refine to LGBTQ (term), accordingly --MikutoH ^talk! 02:47, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to LGBTQ (term)#SGM/GSM/GSRM. fgnievinski (talk) 08:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

• Keep The content on GSRM should be moved to LGBTQ people; it has never really belonged in an article on the term LGBTQ. They both describe the same topic (LGBTQ people), but a WP:WORDISSUBJECT article should be limited to discussing the term-as-a-term. Substantive coverage of the subject the term refers to should be elsewhere.--Trystan (talk) 14:40, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

  I was hoping to to fix the redirect quickly to the current content location. Then, a longer discussion about splitting/merging the content to a better location could be held separately. But since there is was no consensus so far, I've started a counter-proposal: Talk:Sexual_minority#Requested_move_26_April_2025. fgnievinski (talk) 22:26, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra _talk 21:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

The talk discussion was moved to Talk:Sexual and gender minorities#Requested move 26 April 2025. Jay 💬 19:52, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget all to Sexual and gender minorities now that the move is complete.--Trystan (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

  @MikutoH: What do you think? (since you didn't participate in that move discussion) Jay 💬 19:54, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

  @Jay: I perceive it now that that would be the best target. and undoubtedly now the title suffices all of these. also, that section linking doesn't work anymore. --MikutoH ^talk! 15:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Waluigi Pinball

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

France in 1248

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Graduation toga

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cyanogen hydride

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nantes University

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

German Film Museum

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 11#German Film Museum

LGBT Living & Weddings

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Second occupation of La Paz

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

Fur baby

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Socialism in Germany

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7.

Christian Blinkenberg

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of Nickelodeon Characters

• List of Nickelodeon Characters → List of programs broadcast by Nickelodeon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not saying it has to be deleted, but there is no character list at the article. Can anyone find another target? RanDom 404 (talk) 20:08, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

• I don't see a list-of-lists for this, and it's a plausible enough search term, so I guess retarget to Category:Lists of Nickelodeon television series characters and create List of Nickelodeon characters to match. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 05:35, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:48, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

There is a list article in the page history already. The article survived an AfD but was subsequently BLARd. Jay 💬 10:49, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Don't retarget to a category and create a cross namespace redirect. Gonnym (talk) 18:09, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

• Restore the list article without prejudice to a second AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 13:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 07:04, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per Tamzin. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete due to the incorrect capitalization. I'm not opposed to Tamzin's suggestion for List of Nickelodeon characters, but I'd prefer to leave it red until a proper list-of-lists can be created (I do see scope for one). -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:29, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Boq

• Boq → List of Oz characters (created by Baum)#Boq  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Tin Woodman#The Tin Man in later fiction. Boq is a minor character in the original The Wonderful Wizard of Oz novel; he was later reappropriated into a different character in Wicked, where he plays a substantial role and is combined with the character of the Tin Woodman. Hence, the Wicked character is the primary topic, not the Wizard of Oz character who was barely in the novel. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:49, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to BOQ. Perhaps you could modify that disambig page to add the Wicked character (having never seen Wicked, I don't feel qualified to do it). Plant🌱man (talk) 14:29, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep, the current target addresses both uses of the character. The proposed target does not. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  @Tavix could we not add a hat note at the proposed target? Plant🌱man (talk) 16:13, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  I've added one at the current target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you. Plant🌱man (talk) 18:11, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  @Tavix additionally, a google search for “Boq” gives the Wicked character as one of its primary results. Plant🌱man (talk) 16:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  Which is why the current target should be kept. Two of the three paragraphs are dedicated to Wicked. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  I do understand that; however, it’s evidently not the primary topic. Additionally, I could see someone typing, e.g. the abbreviation for “Bill of quantities” or “Bank of Queensland” as “boq”; hence, why I’m suggesting to Retarget to the dab page. I do type abbreviations in lowercase sometimes. Plant🌱man (talk) 18:10, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  The initialisms are BOQ (or BoQ), not Boq. They are therefore not a factor in determining a primary topic for Boq. Because it's incorrect, I have no issue giving anyone searching in that fashion an extra click to get to the disambiguation. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  And the content there doesn't even belong. List of Oz characters (created by Baum) is about characters in the Oz books who were created by L. Frank Baum. Wicked is an unofficial prequel that was not authorized by the Baum estate and therefore not part of the canonical series; not only that, but the version of Boq in Wicked was created by Gregory Maguire, not Baum. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  The content there belongs—the scope of this list is Oz characters created by Baum, it's not strictly limited to Baum's novels. Most sections include post-Baum appearances where relevant (eg: Return to Oz, The Muppets' Wizard of Oz). That said, it may be better to restore article given the recent interest in the character thanks to the film(s). -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to BOQ. In my searches Bill of quantities is the closest thing to a primary topic, with the Bank of Queensland also prominent in results. Of those results using the "Boq" capitalisation, the Wicked character is the only encyclopaedic result in the first five pages (3 hits, one of which is NSFW fan fiction). Unfortunately I don't know of a case-sensitive general purpose search engine. The dab page should be improved to cover the Wicked character regardless of the outcome of this RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  Note WP:DIFFCAPS. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

  I explicitly addressed capitalisation in my comment. Thryduulf (talk) 00:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

  I'm aware: Of those results using the "Boq" capitalisation, the Wicked character is the only encyclopaedic result in the first five pages. The "Boq" capitalisation is the one being discussed, so you make a clear claim for the Wicked character as the primary topic for the capitalisation in question. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

  The dab page should be improved to cover the Wicked character:  Done Plant🌱man (talk) 06:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Several options, no consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:59, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to dab page then both Oz-ite characters can be listed -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to BOQ as there are several plausible targets in that dab --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:46, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Tavix per DIFFCAPS, and as the current target addresses the Wicked part better than the nom's proposal. It's certainly a disadvantage having a 3-letter name, for it to be seen more of an abbreviation, however Wikipedia should not be limited by case-insensitive search engines. Jay 💬 15:13, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Butt (sailing)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 15#Butt (sailing)

Tawnia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sussexes settle in California

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Alex McGarry

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bryce Bonnin

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 10#Bryce Bonnin

Redirects to Balitang Bisdak

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

LGB drop the T

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Vatican Press

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 10#Vatican Press

May 1

CUSMA

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

University of Arizona, Tempe

• University of Arizona, Tempe → Arizona State University  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• University of Arizona at Tempe → Arizona State University  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

People mix up Arizona's two largest state universities all the time, and this misleading redirect set does not help. Arizona State University is not part of the University of Arizona, though they share a board of regents. I understand why it might look reasonable to create at a forum like AfC, but this is a bad idea (and a very seldom-used one, 66 pageviews in five years). Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 10:10, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

• This should lead somewhere where people can find whichever university it is they are looking for. The targets I've found so far are Arizona#Public universities in Arizona and List of colleges and universities in Arizona, but neither are perfect. Thryduulf (talk) 10:57, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep I think that this is a common enough misnomer to warrant a redirect. For example, see [19], [20], [21], all of which seem to mean ASU but refer to it as U of A. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep There is only one public university in Tempe (Arizona State) so I don't think this redirect will cause confusion. TruenoCity (talk) 17:12, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. University of Arizona ≠ Arizona State University, and respectively, Tucson, Arizona ≠ Tempe, Arizona. Let's not pretend like they are equal. There are adequate hatnotes on both articles already to distinguish each other; these redirects essentially have WP:XY issues with either their wrong university name or wrong city name. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
• Weak keep Not sure whether these are more likely to resolve confusion or cause it, but are unambiguous incorrect names for the current target. I have tagged the redirects as such. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

• Delete I see the reasons for keeping, but I agree with what Steel1943 explained above. The fact is that University of Arizona is located in Tucson, not Tempe and adding such redirect would be misleading - I think keeping such redirects would reinforce incorrect detail and further contribute to spreading the misnomer. Asteramellus (talk) 01:27, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as misleading. Search results should suffice. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Tavix. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
• Weak keep per Mdewman6, with appreciation for the addition of the tags. "University of State" and "State State University" can frequently be confused. I'm just a bit skeptical because there's a hint of partisanship here, the possibility that these are the work of someone affiliated with the University of Arizona wanting to slight Arizona State by suggesting they're a satellite campus. But contributions of the IP who requested them suggest a more general interest in college American football. I'll also note they requested the creation of University of Tempe, another incorrect name (which I'll tag) that doesn't have that potential baggage. --BDD (talk) 15:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
• I've looked again in light of the comments subsequent to mine and while I still think a target that regards neither as primary is best, keeping would be more helpful to readers than deletion so put that down as my second preference. Thryduulf (talk) 11:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)
• I'm inclined to go with Asteramellus' delete vote because of the .. reinforce incorrect detail and further contribute to spreading the misnomer. Searching should not be affected as there are several other helpful redirects to the current target, including Tempe University, similar to the one BDD mentioned. Jay 💬 07:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. After reading the comments above and thinking about it, I'm convinced that keeping the redirect is likely to increase confusion and misunderstandings. If a reader searches for this phrase and lands on the ASU article, they're likely to think that what they searched for is a valid name for this university. The other proposed targets seem too general to me – better to let the search results do their job. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:32, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Who the hell is Steve Jobs

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ghana road accident

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nick Gore

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

President of Vatican City

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

List of Shen Gong Wu revealed in Season One

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

Phoenix Down

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 10#Phoenix Down

U.N.I.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Water (album, ARTIST NAME)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Time/Space Mage

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ukrainian cargo plane crash

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 8#Ukrainian cargo plane crash

Alaska C-I7 plane crash

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 14#Alaska C-I7 plane crash

Wesołych Świąt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Short break

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus on whether to restore or delete, and hence restore since deletion requires an explicit consensus. This restore-delete bickering happens over an over in every RfD, using arguments that aren't very specific to the merits of the redirect, and basically never comes to a consensus on which action to take, which is unfortunate, but it's all I have to work with. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Roubke

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 10#Roubke

Heil elon

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Active species

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bleeding and Blood Clotting

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 8#Bleeding and Blood Clotting

Organic output

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Xe/xem

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 8#Xe/xem