Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 31

October 31

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 31, 2024.

Counter-Strike player models

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-Strike player models → Counter-Strike (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Counter strike player models → Counter-Strike (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Page says nothing about player models (also the redirect already has counter strike in it so it's redundant) TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Was an attempt at an article, but there's nothing significant there and can be safely deleted. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

White Gangster

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

White Gangster → Mad Decent#Associated artists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; no longer associated with the record label. Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:22, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

SpydaT.E.K

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpydaT.E.K → Mad Decent#Associated artists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; no longer associated with the record label. Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:24, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

GKR (DJ)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GKR (DJ) → Mad Decent#Associated artists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; no longer associated with the record label. Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They appear to be fairly notable so delete per WP:REDYES TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ricardo Drue

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo Drue → Mad Decent#Associated artists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target; no longer associated with the record label. Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Searching this name on google, it appears that he is fairly notable as there are numerous news outlets covering his death (assuming that this is the same person the redirect is referring to). Delete per WP:REDYES TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the same Ricardo Drue. One of the songs mentioned in one of the articles is his 2014 release, "Vagabond", a Mad Decent release. Jalen Barks (Woof) 20:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Wikipedia:Standard articles

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was restore and mark as historical. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 15:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Standard articles → Wikipedia:Good articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The standards for good articles have increased over the years after 2005 and at this point, good articles probably would be considered way above "standard". TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a rather odd case. If you look into the page's history, it was originally a proposal that was in effect more or less a fork of the GA process. After a discussion on the talk page, it was ultimately redirected to the GA page. Not sure how we should handle this given the history here. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It could possibly be restored with the failed proposal template if the content on there is of any value. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 06:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually think that's the best option. It's a historical proposal that failed, mark it as such and leave it be. Fieari (talk) 07:39, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at Wikipedia talk:Standard articles it seems as though this was really envisaged as a way of marking articles which were at a very basic quality level, below WP:GA. WP:ASSESS was in its infancy at the time, but really it looks as though it was meant to be for articles which were better than start class but not yet at GA level. It seems unlikely that anyone searching for "Standard articles" is looking for the GA process, and there are only a handful of links on the entire project; restoring as {{historical}}/{{failed proposal}} seems like the best option to me. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 09:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This should be kept somehow (perhaps marked {{historical}}). I'm not sure where to best keep it, but if we can't think of anything better, just leave as is. Or un-redirect and send to MfD, which is a better place to deal with this kind of historical stuff. —Kusma (talk) 16:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore and mark as historical, per above. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:09, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore and mark as historical, per above. Cos ^{(X + Z)} 22:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore and mark as historical I was hopeful someone would figure out the procedure here, and agree that preserving this as a failed proposal is the best solution. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

WPSECONDARY

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WPSECONDARY → Wikipedia:No original research#Secondary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Don't think minor errors in discussions justify creating WP:XNRs TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Malformed title that is technically an WP:XNR due to the missing colon. Steel1943 (talk) 22:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think this needs a cross namespace redirect, and it's has no apparent usage. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 23:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can't find it using CTRL F where "What links here" says it is, so I guess we can do it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:58, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Steel1943. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per those above. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 15:19, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Tesonet

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#Tesonet

WH:HG

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedily deleted per criterion G7. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:56, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WH:HG → Wikipedia:Huggle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Improper redirect because improper namespace. It appears that Vchimpanzee likes to create redirects for any linking error typo that goes down in discussion space. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment But that leaves a red link in the discussion when we're not technically supposed to edit others' comments. Although I have fixed Wlinks to other topics archived discussions.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What links here and CTRL-F don't result in anything, so I guess go ahead.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

PKS 0451-28

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#PKS 0451-28

Nortwest Airways

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. ✗plicit 02:39, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nortwest Airways → Northwest Airlines (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 11 § Nortwest Airways – keep

Delete not a plausable redirect, it only has 12 Google hits after removing duplicate results and 2 of those results are definitely from Wikipedia and some of the others also could be. There is no reason to have a redirect from such an obscure typo per WP:COSTLY and although kept in 2012 there is more of a consensus in 2024 that implausible redirects should be deleted like Georgia (U.S. state and Wikipedia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Improbable misspelling. Kablammo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kablammo (talk • contribs) 09:47, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - previously kept, completely harmless, I'd say that WP:COSTLY#Sending redirects to RFD is costly applies. A7V2 (talk) 03:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per A7V2 and the fact that absolutely nothing has changed since it was last discussed and kept. Nominations like this are very significantly more costly than even the most harmful redirect is. Thryduulf (talk) 12:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need a redirect for every misspelling? Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per A7V2 and Thryduulf. This is a different sort of redirect than a trailing period or a missing character from the Wikipedia-specific disambiguator. I don't advocate for creating redirects for "every misspelling" but also don't think, in general, they should be deleted (particularly if there's already been a discussion and there's nothing new that makes it costly). Skynxnex (talk) 03:01, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This would be R3 eligible if it were new. Highly implausible error, especially given that it uses "Airways" instead of "Airlines", a historical name of the company discontinued almost a century ago. There are over a thousand pages starting with "Northwest" (I stopped counting); should we make this redirect for all of them? Those complaining about the time/effort spent on discussion could remedy that by simply not contesting these sorts of bad redirects. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:54, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What other redirects do, don't or could exist is completely irrelevant. The previous discussion determined that this redirect is plausible and useful, what has changed since then? Your final sentence presupposes that this is a bad redirect, which consensus determined it is not. Thryduulf (talk) 11:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No such determination was made. In fact, no one argued for its usefulness, only enough of the usual crowd making hand-waving gestures about it being harmless, which is not a valid keep argument. In fact, evidence has been presented here about how implausible it is, while you're merely whining about this wasting time...time which you could be saving by not bothering to contest this, especially since you seem to have no actual substantive argument for keeping, only that you dislike it being nominated again. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being harmless is sufficient reason to keep a redirect, based on the consensus arrived at in thousands (at least) of redirect discussions over the years. Nobody has actually presented any evidence this is harmful, beyond a subjective assertion that a plausible misspelling becomes implausible just because it's a misspelling of a former name. If it was implausible it would have been found implausible last time, it wasn't. Thryduulf (talk) 12:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Being harmless is sufficient reason to keep a redirect" Not true, nor is any redirect truly harmless. "beyond a subjective assertion that a plausible misspelling becomes implausible just because it's a misspelling of a former name. " Specific evidence *was* presented, see the nomination, and yes, combining an already implausible error with a long since obsolete term increases the overall implausibility of the term as a whole. "If it was implausible it would have been found implausible last time, it wasn't." Horse shit, consensus can change, and it's not like the handful of people that happened to weigh in last time had some magical insight that would have settled this once and for all. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am not convinced by the arguments that this is an implausible misspelling. To the anon's point, the company was founded as "Northwest Airways" and only later used "Airlines." - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 12:56, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, and as I mentioned, that change happened almost a century ago, making this already implausible misspelling (see evidence presented in nomination) even more implausible. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:35, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The correct title of the former name Northwest Airways already exists. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, WhisperToMe demonstrated in the previous RfD why this is a plausible misspelling. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Harmless, does not seem implausible to me, old, WP:CHEAP, and all the other arguments above and in the previous RFD discussion... nothing has changed. Fieari (talk) 23:18, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

buccal organ(s)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buccal organ → Sucker (zoology) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Buccal organs → Sucker (zoology) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

closed before with consensus that we're not biologists. trying again with the same rationale (that being that mouths have other organs, like teeth and tongues), so i hope y'all studied your chompy boys. still not sure if retargeting to mouth would be the best idea though cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment looking at it from an English language point of view, it should point to mouth, or a generalized orifice topic for the entry point to the digestive tract -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think mouth is the best option for buccal organ – it's the buccal organ, it just contains some other lesser ones. The mouth is, you could say, the mother of all buccal organs. Cremastra (talk) 00:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be retargeting this to "mouth". No one is typing "buccal organ" into wikipedia and expecting to find "mouth", since we just have the word "mouth" for that. The reason that "buccal organ" exists is to describe different kinds of mouth-like things. Like the thing annelida have. It doesn't describe teeth and tongues. -- asilvering (talk) 00:57, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
by definition, it does. teeth, being bones, are a little iffy (some could say i was... wrong!?), but tongues, as noted in the article, are explicitly organs that are in the mouth (and thus, buccal), and so are lips now that i think about it again. this article i found within 20 minutes of looking around refers to "buccal organs" as just organs in the mouth of humans, and this article does the same for birds (and with less subtlety). if there are species of birds and humans that have suckers, i probably missed them, in which case my bad cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 01:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and of course, the exact moment i decide to click reply, i remember that there's a list of organs of the human body here, and it happens to list teeth as organs that are in the mouth. what are the chances~? yes, i know other species also have mouths that may not have tongues, lips, or teeth, i'm just using humans as an example cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 01:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the proposed target Mouth.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:29, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, then, let's just delete it. Any target will be imperfect or at least controversial, so I think deletion is unfortunately the best option here. Cremastra (u — c) 01:41, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and trout the nominator for wasting time with this nomination. Nothing has changed since the last discussion, so we shouldn't be doing anything different to it now. Thryduulf (talk) 12:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
trouts don't have suckers. i recommend a leech, octopus, or sucker-footed bat. also, what here or there would suggest keeping? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:09, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems to be a nonstandard term at best, and vague at worst. There is a mention at the target, but it's unsourced, and probably WP:UNDUE even if it were. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
there ain't no mention no more cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 10:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No mention anymore, confusing redirect. And buccal in anatomical usage refers to the cheek, not the mouth as a whole. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:06, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:34, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Umm how did this get here TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok it looks like someone created a redirect in the mainspace just to fix some error in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Age and health concerns of Joe Biden. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, WP:G6. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as G6 per above. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 06:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but not as G6. G6 only applies when the redirect was created in error (or automatically created by moving a page created at the wrong title), but this redirect was clearly created deliberately so it does not apply. Thryduulf (talk) 11:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, WP:G6. Whether the creator of the redirect "intentionally" created the redirect or not, it was clearly created in an error on their part. BD2412 T 16:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of G6 "error" means "accidentally" not "contrary to consensus about what redirects should be created". Thryduulf (talk) 13:44, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see the correct link is found in the discussion several times, so it should be no problem to have the red link in the closed discussion.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as XNR. R2 doesn't apply as it excludes redirect from mainsapce to project space and I'm not sure G6 applies as it wasn't created in error but I'd argue it should still be deleted as otherwise per WP:PANDORA we could create a redirect to every AFD from mainspace. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PANDORA is irrelevant nonsense here: A redirect could be created to every AfD regardless of whether this redirect exists or not. What you have not explained is why redirects to AfDs should not exist, let alone why this redirect specifically should not exist. "Delete because other redirects might exist in the future if we don't" is WP:ATA#CRYSTAL and WP:OTHERSTUFF. Thryduulf (talk) 13:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unnecessary cross-namespace. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a bad cross-namespace redirect with possible WP:PANDORA implications. Duckmather (talk) 03:19, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What PANDORA implications are they, and why are they relevant? Other bad cross-namespace redirects can and should be deleted because they are bad cross-namespace redirects, not because they happen to be similar to a different redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 12:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Strogino CS Portal

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strogino CS Portal → Counter-Strike (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of the redirect in article. Doing a bit of research, it appears to be a pirating site with nothing closely related to the CS series. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:43, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Building a sentry

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Building a sentry → Team Fortress 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

In a game where nearly every quote is iconic, what is special about this quote specifically? TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

line iconic to the engineer, but i'd say delete for now until he gets his own article. not that i have much faith in him getting his right now, since heavy and medic are ~~hotter~~ more iconic cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Day belt

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Day belt → Belt (clothing) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

yes, this is a halloween-themed discussion, have you seen a belt up close? unmentioned, and no definition on wiktionary. results gave me belts with the word "day" written on them for one reason or another, belts (not necessarily of the kind you put on your pants) seemingly made by companies or as part of models that contain the word "day", belts (again, not necessarily for pants) meant to be worn during the day or daily for whatever reason, belts intended to be gifted during specific days, and... supplements. am i missing something? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:22, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no apparent reason for this to exist. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2028 ICC Women's T20 World Cup

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2028 ICC Women's T20 World Cup → ICC Women's T20 World Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target, anybody searching for this term will unexpectedly find nothing of relevance. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ICC has announced the Women's FTP from 2025-29 which indicates that there will be a Women's T20 WC in 2028

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] This articles provide proofs of such an event. Kumarpramit (talk) 17:21, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's all well and good, that's not disputed. The problem is that there's absolutely no relevant information at the target, so anybody who searches this term is finding nothing except the year 2028 in the table. The host nation isn't even confirmed or included, nor is anything regarding the bidding discussed the target. The redirect is misleading as a result. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Heymanimjosh - until we have relevant content beyond "it is scheduled to happen" the redirect is actively unhelpful. Thryduulf (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2031 Africa Cup of Nations

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2031 Africa Cup of Nations → Africa Cup of Nations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Absolutely no relevant information at the target, the redirect is misleading and WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. We have no information for any tournament beyond 2029. Thryduulf (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2033 SEA Games

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 02:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2033 SEA Games → SEA Games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The only relevant information at the target is the host country, the host city hasn't even been determined yet. Anybody searching for this term will not be finding information that they would be expecting. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:22, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to encourage article creation when the time comes. I've removed the link in the navbox, which leaves no other incoming links. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Lists of Telugu films of future years

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Telugu films of 2030 → Telugu cinema (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of Telugu films of 2029 → Telugu cinema (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of Telugu films of 2028 → Telugu cinema (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of Telugu films of 2027 → Telugu cinema (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of Telugu films of 2026 → Telugu cinema (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Misleading redirects, no list of films for these years at the target. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Note that these are redirects with history, though those histories only contain an empty article skeleton with headings and a navbox. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:14, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

IRAS 13349+1428

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#IRAS 13349+1428

Liberal Democratic Hotline Team

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was no consensus. ✗plicit 02:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal Democratic Hotline Team → Liberal Democrats (UK) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target page/ -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but ideally add a mention. This is an alternative designation that was used in some council elections in 1990 by some party members, along with Liberal Democratic Focus Team and Liberal Democratic Spotlight Team (Focus Team at least is/was used in more elections and is mentioned in the article) and so appears in election results tables. Those candidates represented the Liberal Democrats so should take readers to the article about that party, but yes a mention would be ideal. Thryduulf (talk) 14:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Basically per Thryduulf. Plausible search term, and plausibly something that might be in a results table on Wiki somewhere. I guess this is similar to the Conservatives running as "Local Conservatives". FOARP (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no mention of a Hotline Team and thereby being a misleading redirect. Recreate the redirect when a mention is added. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There is good reason to mention this in the article, and then to recreate this redirect. While we're at it, also delete Liberal Democratic Spotlight Team for the exact same reason, and proceed with it in the same manner. Renerpho (talk) 11:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per accordance of Utopes and Renerpho. WP:COSTLY applies. ✴️Icarus The Astrologer✴️ 23:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:12, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Has incoming links. Readers are better served by blue links redirecting them to the relevant party (even without an explicit mention) than red links leaving them none the wiser. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Putting wedge

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#Putting wedge

Cackala

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cackala → Kamala Harris (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

@Hyphenation Expert: nominated this for R3 because WP:RNEUTRAL: not "in multiple mainstream RS". I have declined this. The term is indeed attested on the internet (c.f. e.g. https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/09/the-biden-we-were-told-about-never-existed/ and https://moonbattery.com/biden-harris-regime-authorizes-military-to-kill-us/ ), which I think makes it a perfectly reasonable thing for someone to type in the search bar, even if they're not expecting a full article on this word. Duckmather (talk) 13:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is contentious information about a living person; if it is not notable enough to be described on Wikipedia with an inline citation to a reliable source, the redirect is WP:G10. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete silly childish nickname that I doubt very much will ever really be a search term. Slatersteven (talk) 14:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RNEUTRAL: not "in multiple mainstream RS". The National Review article doesn't say "Cackala"; it's a comment in the comment section (WP:NATIONALREVIEW is "no consensus" reliable anyway). Moonbattery is a WordPress blog. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 14:18, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Keep Very widely used to the extent it's plausible someone will see it out of context and look for information on who it refers to. "Childish" nicknames are definitely not G10 material. Thryduulf (talk) 14:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete per WP:G10. Ibadibam (talk) 18:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thryduulf, your declining of the speedy deletion nom and then also !voting here is an improper WP:INVOLVED action. Please revert one of them. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that this was inappropriate and neither action was in my capacity as an admin. Anybody can contest a speedy deletion nomination (other than the creator, in some circumstances) and it was already being discussed here. Thryduulf (talk) 19:48, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
100% not WP:INVOLVED. All speedy deletion requests (other than office actions and copyright violations) are negated if any user objects, and as there is already a non-unanimous deletion discussion underway (this discussion), the article is not eligible for G10 and any admin acting responsibly should have declined the request. The accountability policy deals specifically with admin actions, not all things an admin might do; some take the view that declining a speedy deletion request is an admin action regardless of the fact that any user can decline, but !voting in a straw poll is definitely not an admin action. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because I don't imagine Kamala Harris would be particularly worried about a redirect to the Wikipedia article on her, and so BLP worries aren't major. I'm amazed that WP:RNEUTRAL is being used as a rationale for deletion (and even speedy deletion!) when it says nothing other than "treat non-neutral redirects like any other redirect" with only an implication of applying slightly more caution. The point is – it's a plausible search term as it's a nickname so divorced from Harris' actual name that readers would be liable to not immediately understand to whom it refers, and seek this site for an explanation. J 947 ‡ ^edits 04:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"it says nothing other than 'treat non-neutral redirects like any other redirect'"

In fact, it says redirects that are not established terms – used in multiple mainstream reliable sources – may be nominated for deletion. And even: G10 and G3 may apply. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sufficiently in-use in the wild that someone may legitimately be confused by it and want to know who is being referred to. Redirects are generally non-user facing, so this should not introduce any WP:BLP issues. I might have suggested it be added to List of nicknames used by Donald Trump, except to my astonishment he actually hasn't used it personally that I can tell, it's just in wide wide WIDESPREAD use by his fans. MAGAs are weird. Fieari (talk) 01:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : A nonsensical derogatory name used a few times by Magas on social media and once by a partisan magazine should not be sufficient criterion for it's inclusion on Wikipedia. Nohorizonss (talk) 07:34, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is textbook WP:RCOM, without there being any prominent use of it as a reference to Harris. FOARP (talk) 09:46, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Thryduulf et al. Silly nickname, widely-used in social media (which makes it plausible enough for keeping). Reasons for deletion seem a bit over the top IMO, considering that this isn't a grave insult in any way. CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:29, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:RNEUTRAL's stated exception: not established terms [that] are unlikely to be useful may be deleted, in this case under reason for deletion #3: The redirect is offensive or abusive. A non-neutral term is established if it is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources. This particular term is not, apparently appearing in zero mainstream reliable sources. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:42, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being used in multiple-mainstream reliable sources is just an example of how a term might be established. The widespread use on social media seen here is another example. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our gauge for "widespread use on social media" normally is the published opinion of reliable sources, not editors' assertions that it is so, nor editors' claims to have seen this or that on Twitter. Have we lowered this standard for BLPs when the subject is a political figure? Or does WP:BLP still say things like "never use [...] social network posts [...] as sources of material about a living person" and "contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion"? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a huge difference between things that appear in articles, that is, are "user facing", and things meant to act as navigation aides. The former needs proper sourcing, the latter just needs to be helpful and not misleading. Redirects absolutely do not need to be held to the same standard as article text. Fieari (talk) 23:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-neutral terms widely used on social media and similar but not regularly reported in mainstream media are exactly the sort of things people will search for, either because they want to find neutral information about the subject and don't realise the term is non-neutral or not mainstream or because they don't know or don't remember who/what is being referred to. Wikipedia redirects help both these groups find the information they are looking for (which is after all the primary goal of Wikipedia). They don't need to be neutral (indeed per WP:RNEUTRAL explicitly so), they just need to be accurate and useful. All that needs verifying is "is this term used to refer to the subject of/information found at the target?" and social media is reliable for that. Thryduulf (talk) 12:25, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Being used in multiple-mainstream reliable sources is just an example of how a term might be established. The widespread use on social media seen here is another example.: I'm not as sure of that. WP:RNEUTRAL's language is if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral. Being used in multiple mainstream reliable sources is the way a non-neutral term becomes an established term, or at least that's what was agreed at the guideline establishes a term. With social media so diffuse and disparate, both big and siloed, I'm not sure how we can collectively feel sure of the reach of a term not otherwise recognized. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 19:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RNEUTRAL. Enix150 (talk) 20:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As noted above, this redirect is compatible with RNEUTRAL. Thryduulf (talk) 11:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not mentioned at target, plain and simple. All this back-and-forth about neutrality is smoke and mirrors. Anyone looking for encyclopedic information about the nickname will find none (nor is there a mention anywhere in WP), leaving the reader with wasted time at best, and confusion at worst. John Q Reader searches for this, finds himself at the Harris article and wonders, "why am I here? is this a nickname? why? is it her own nickname? someone else's? good? bad? in between? is it vandalism?" etc etc. People have mentioned "valid search term", which is it, but for itself, not for Harris. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per 35.139.154.158. I was leaning toward "keep" because it sounds like it's become popular online; if it gets used, it's a reasonable redirect on plausibility grounds, regardless of references in major media. However, we shouldn't go confusing readers, which this redirect is likely to do. If we keep it, someone who encounters this term for the first time and searches it on Wikipedia will be confused, as the IP says about John Q Reader, while if we delete it, someone who knows that it means Harris and searches it on Wikipedia will know how to find her article without help from this redirect. Nyttend (talk) 00:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per 35.139.154.158. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Lego racers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nom (myself) - closing this hoping that the rules at WP:NACD for self-withdrawal apply here, if not I expect to hear about it! (non-admin closure) 🎃 ASUKITE🎃 16:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lego racers → Lego Racers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unnecessary as Mediawiki automatically forwards searches to the correct capitalization, and there are currently no links to this capitalization. 🎃 ASUKITE🎃 16:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and retag as {{R from miscapitalisation}}. Search is basically case insensitive but URLs are not. Skynxnex (talk) 16:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh yeah now we're getting some spooky redirects. keep and tag. including plausible miscapitalizations (usually in sentence or title case or all caps) is standard procedure around these parts (see super mario 64 with a lowercase m and ULTRAKILL) cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speediest Keep ever. We don't delete simple miscapitalizations even if they aren't linked as they could still be used in the future. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 16:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I know almost nothing about typical retention rules for redirects as I haven't participated much in removing them, so I'm happy to Withdraw this nom and I will keep this in mind for the future. 🎃 ASUKITE🎃 16:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Firstly

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was No consensus This discussion is split basically perfectly down the middle between "delete", "retarget to dab" and "retarget to Wiktionary". But nobody likes the current target, so we have to pick an option somehow. "delete" isn't it since deletion requires an explicit consensus. Of the people who expressed an opinon on where to retarget to, 2 (Ca, Web-julio) are fine with both, 2 (65.92.246.77, Nyttend) explicitly support the dab and are silent on Wiktionary, 3 (jlwoodwa, CFA, Paul_012) explicitly support Wiktionary and are silent on the dab. That's just a hair more support for pointing to Wiktionary, so pointing there as a WP:NCRET close to put this month-old discussion out of its misery. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly → 1 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Secondly → 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Thirdly → 3 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Don't think a redirect relating to the adverb to a page that is specifically about the number is a good idea. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 04:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a term that should be wikilinked. If readers wanted an article about 1, they would search up one, not a derivation of it. It has low pageviews therefore I do not support a soft redirect, since Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on redirecting to DAB per 65.92 These are related terms, but none of the usages(I am not familiar with all of the listed items) can be called "firstly", "secondly", "thirdly". Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also support wiktionary redirects since they contain some grammatical information about the terms, which the readers would presumably be looking for. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bundled Secondly, Thirdly. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 11:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to First (disambiguation) / Second (disambiguation) / Third (disambiguation) -- respectively ; as {{R from adverb}} -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 13:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (all). The dab page is inappropriate, as there are no particular matches there. And otherwise way too vague to retarget anywhere else. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unlikely search term, rarely (if ever) would assist in navigation the site. Drdr150 (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to wikt:firstly, wikt:secondly, wikt:thirdly. These redirects are decades old, and they've seen thousands of pageviews each – we shouldn't delete them as long as they've got reasonable targets. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget either to wikt per jlwoowa or to dabs per IP. The advantage of the target being a DAB is trigger tags and they will be unlinked as unnecessary WP:OVERLINK.
Web-julio (talk) 07:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per jlwoodwa. C F A 💬 14:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of the discussion at First, Second (disambiguation) and Third.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer to delete; soft redirect to Wiktionary as an second option. If an article is ever created on ordinal adverbs, or mentions of the adverb forms added to English numerals#Ordinal numbers, that would be an obvious retarget. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per 65.92.246.77. Adverb forms of words are good redirects for established pages entitled with the corresponding adjective forms. Nyttend (talk) 00:10, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ape Escape Racer

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#Ape Escape Racer

Jamison Wesley Crowder

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jamison Wesley Crowder → Jamison Crowder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I cannot find a source anywhere showing Wesley as his middle name. Red Director (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as author request. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

We're Barack

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We're Barack → Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election#Debate aftermath (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned on the target page. We should not be surprising readers. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

used to be mentioned on Joever article. Got redirected, and no longer mentions it. I agree with deletion. Ca ^{talk to me!} 10:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Young FC

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Young FC → Punjab State Super League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned in target page -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bhuna FC

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhuna FC → Haryana Football Association (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bright (Suikoden)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bright (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)#Characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gadget Z → Suikoden (video game)#Characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16 § Unmentioned Suikoden characters – keep because of a trainwreck

There is no information about these characters at the target or anywhere else on enwiki. The previous RfD closed as a trainwreck, hence renominating for deletion. Jay 💬 08:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete these and the other Suikoden characters from the previous bundle, if I get around to !voting on them. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 10:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Gamma Squeeze

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#Gamma Squeeze

Byron Cemetery

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#Byron Cemetery

List of Super Heavies

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 11#List of Super Heavies

Stone Jesus

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8#Stone Jesus

Alpha myrcene

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Α-Myrcene. (non-admin closure) SerialNumber54129 15:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha myrcene → Myrcene (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target is about β-myrcene, not α-Myrcene; while there is a cited mention at the target, delete to encourage article creation and avoid confusion. Mdewman6 (talk) 04:23, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unusual form of the name (non-hyphenated). But first, the cited content was incorrect (it's been found in several species). And so second, I wrote a α-Myrcene stub about it. So if this redirect is kept it should be re-pointed to the page about the alpha isomer. DMacks (talk) 04:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to stub created by DMacks, above. Fieari (talk) 05:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Srishti

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was disambiguate. Boldly closing this since nobody opposed the creation of the drafted dab. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Srishti → Hindu units of time (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target (not now, and not when a hatnote was added). Looking at Special:PrefixIndex/Srishti, there's a name (Srishti Kaur, Srishti Rana, Srishti Jain), Srishti (film), Srishti Manipal Institute of Art, Design and Technology, and the partial title matches of Srishti Madurai and Srishtidnyan. Looking at the pageviews, I'm unsure whether the name is the primary topic, or if there's no primary topic; I think it might depend on whether the other uses are all derived from the name. It would also help if I had any idea why it was redirected to Hindu units of time; I'll ping Vinay Jha in case they remember. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Sanskrit term means "creation".[6] Hindu units of time doesn't really talk about creation the way Hindu cosmology might, but rather units of time that can be associated to personalities (Brahma) involved in creation. Jroberson108 (talk) 02:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig or Retarget to Sristi (given name), depending on whether the name constitutes a primary topic (I have no opinion on that, but the other uses probably aren't derived directly from the name - as mentioned above, "Srishti" is the Sanskrit word for creation). If retargeting, also create Srishti (disambiguation) for the other uses. The target doesn't mention "Srishti" at all so is clearly not a good target. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 09:28, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus that the current target is inappropriate, but is there a PTOPIC? I'll try to draft a DAB in any case.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 01:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cremastra (u — c) 21:19, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cremastra this is out-of-process, now the page is both a redirect and a disambiguation page. It's very confusing for readers. Why didn't you wait until this RFD was closed? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz It is very standard practice to draft disambiguation pages below rfd templates. In fact, the comment in the template says Don't add anything after this line unless you're drafting a disambiguation page or article to replace the redirect. Cremastra (u — c) 02:09, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

John Atoms

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. After reviewing all the material there appears to be a slight preference for keeping this redirect. Dr vulpes (Talk) 08:03, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Atoms → John Adams (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not a common or likely misspelling, virtually no incoming targets. If for some reason it is kept, I would say retarget to the John Adams dab page. Otherwise, my vote is Delete. TNstingray (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

he's the inventor of atoms, how can you not know him? delete per nom. implausible misspelling, mishearing, and pun cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:13, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the sake of recognizing current education as lacking in definitive broad-based knowledge. It may be an unlikely spelling but not impossible, and doesn't harm the encyclopedia to leave it for those who wander through the weeds (sounds like an alternate-universe name for a comic book about America's founding). Randy Kryn (talk) 13:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Randy. Would also note that incoming targets is a poor test _pbp 14:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
REtarget the ersatz pronunciation spelling to the disambiguation page and tag as {{R from misspelling}} -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an implausible error. A quick google search finds no results of people making such an error, but it does find this in use as at least a couple stage names/aliases, and possibly a real name or two. ~~Also note that our search feature is good enough to suggest "John Adams" as possibly meant instead, making this redirect even more unneeded.~~ 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note that the search feature suggesting "John Adams" is likely because this redirect exists. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Struck, just in case, but that doesn't change my overall assessment. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 12:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 20:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per cogsan and IP user 35.139.154.158. Why does "Atoms" as also misspelled name from "Adams"? IMO, only WP:COSTLY supposed to be delete. ✴️Icarus The Astrologer✴️ 13:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak don't delete (either keep, or retarget per nom), as utterly pointless but also utterly harmless. Redirects are WP:CHEAP. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 09:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 01:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is not a simple misspelling (plausible or not), it's a pun, and we should not have redirects for such unless they prove to be actually used search terms. This is not one. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Put another way, if this were plausible, it would presuppose we would need a hatnote at atom for readers looking for Adams. Such a hatnote does not nor should not exist. Nor should this redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:15, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

BlueChew

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 06:42, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This should be deleted because "BlueChew" (or even "blue chew") are not mentioned in the target article at all, so how do we know that that refers to the same thing? Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 00:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Less than a minute on Google tells me this is a very notable brand of Sildenafil tablets so the target is correct. I'm not familiar with the consensus about when brand names should be listed on medical articles though so I'll leave a note on the talk page. Thryduulf (talk)
Comment Actually, BlueChew is a brand of several chewable erectile disfunction drugs. As well as sildenafil, they also offer tadalafil and vardenafil under the Blue Chew brand name. Cullen328 (talk) 04:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The search snippet for their website says, "BlueChew is a telemedicine service offering Sildenafil, Tadalafil, and Vardenafil Chewable Tablets for men." Would be misleading to redirect to just one of them. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:47, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Gxarha

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. A discussion on whether to move the article to Gxarha can take place in the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gxarha → Morgan Bay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirect title appears to be a musician that happens to come from this area? Not mentioned at target article, possible promotion LR.127 (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't otherwise guess what this is. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The town of Morgan Bay was renamed Gxarha in 2022 [7]. I'll add a mention to the article. Thryduulf (talk) 04:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Now that a mention has been added, as bold text in the opening line, should probably WP:SNOW close this one. Fieari (talk) 05:38, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above, and the article should presumably be moved to the new town name. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Move to new title per above. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 16:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't done a full in-depth source, but the impression I got was that Morgan Bay (or Morgan's Bay) is still the common name. A quick scan of articles about other South African settlements renamed about the same time shows a very roughly even split between old and new names. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#South Africa is silent on the matter, as are most subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa although Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa/Name changes implies the common name should be used. Accordingly I suggest not moving without first firmly establishing that Gxarha is the common name (an RM may be worthwhile). Thryduulf (talk) 18:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Il giustiziere

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 06:42, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Il giustiziere → The "Human" Factor (1975 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

As per WP:RFOREIGN, this is a translation of the film title with no significance LR.127 (talk) 00:20, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an English-language film produced in the UK. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 03:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFOR. Fieari (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:RFOR. This is an English language Wikipedia. Graywalls (talk) 12:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I originally created the redirect. It was motivated by encountering the Italian movie title in English-language content about the soundtrack music by Italian composer Ennio Morricone. If it does qualify as a redirect worth keeping, it would be under "topics for which a non-English title is in common use even if that is not the common English". A majority of the English language retail sites selling the soundtrack album use the Italian title, though that's not a great authority to cite. I'm okay with whatever this discussion concludes. Joseph Hewes (talk) 20:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As Joseph Hewes says, the title does appear to be found in English-language sources, where it almost exclusively refers to the soundtrack album (but not the film itself). If a soundtrack section existed in the article the redirect could be refined to point there, but that is not the case. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

October 31

Counter-Strike player models

White Gangster

SpydaT.E.K

GKR (DJ)

Ricardo Drue

Wikipedia:Standard articles

WPSECONDARY

Tesonet

WH:HG

PKS 0451-28

Nortwest Airways

buccal organ(s)

Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump

Strogino CS Portal

Building a sentry

Day belt

Hat Simulator

The Human Aquarium

2029 in spaceflight

2028 ICC Women's T20 World Cup

2031 Africa Cup of Nations

2033 SEA Games

Lists of Telugu films of future years

IRAS 13349+1428

Liberal Democratic Hotline Team

Putting wedge

Cackala

Lego racers

Firstly

Ape Escape Racer

Jamison Wesley Crowder

We're Barack

Young FC

Bhuna FC

Bright (Suikoden)

Gamma Squeeze

Byron Cemetery

List of Super Heavies

Stone Jesus

Alpha myrcene

Srishti

John Atoms

BlueChew

Gxarha

Il giustiziere