Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 29[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 29, 2019.

Tyga Song[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:42, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous and pointless redirect, doesn't refer to any song in particular. CycloneYoris talk! 22:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Happy to delete but failing that a weak weak retarget to Tyga discography. Too vague to be of any real use, it's left over from a page move so could perhaps be deleted per WP:G6. PC78 (talk) 06:47, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: there is no subject "Tiger Song". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Barriefolk[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:42, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the References section, this redirect corresponds to the URL of a folk society based in Barrie. I don't think that makes for an appropriate redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 22:45, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. A small, not very notable local organization based in a city does not need a redirect to the overview article about the whole city. Bearcat (talk) 15:38, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Buckeye Country Fest[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target, seems promotional and undue. signed, Rosguill talk 22:12, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Not helpful to readers, added only a month ago, so unlikely to have any incoming links from outside Wikipedia. TJRC (talk) 22:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

TD Canada Trust Sunfest[edit]

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. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 02:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Target and provided sources don't make any mention of "TD Canada Trust". signed, Rosguill talk 21:44, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Rogue Valley Coyotes[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Coyotes were apparently a proposed baseball team to play ten years after the target article's team ceased operations. The Coyotes are not mentioned nor are related to the target article. The Coyotes never appears to have played and the redirect was only created to circumvent a proposed deletion. The redirect is unused. Yosemiter (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Control Commission for Germany - British Element[edit]

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 Allied-occupied Germany#British Zone of Occupation. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 21:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too specific / one-sided; term as such apparently not included in given target. Hildeoc (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To bundle Control Commission for Germany – British Element
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 19:46, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Allied-occupied Germany#British Zone of Occupation, which has the most detailed information on the subject that I can find. Allied Commission is an overview article and not a specific organization. The Germany-specific commission is at Allied Control Council (although that wasn't obvious to me at first because of the similarities in the name). Even then, the "Control Commission for Germany - British Element" is only briefly mentioned. Note that there are around 50 links between both redirects so it is a well-used term. -- Tavix (talk) 19:59, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Tavix. There's a red link at that section to Control Commission for Germany (British Element), so this might be more of a {{R from related topic}}. I suppose the Control Commission was the body that administered the Zone of Occupation? This seems helpful enough, in absence of an article on the commission. --BDD (talk) 17:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Robert (Bob) Earl "Butterbean" Love[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From reading Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 15#Robert (Bob) Earl “Butterbean” Love, there seems to be consensus to delete the redirect even setting aside the curly quotes issue, so this one should follow. Having a full name and a hypocorism in brackets and a nickname in quotes is implausible. -- Tavix (talk) 19:30, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Turtukiña[edit]

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 deleted per G7. -- Tavix (talk) 21:48, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am at a loss as to the purpose of this redirect. Internet searches lead me to believe that this is a Basque term, but explain nothing as to why this is pointing at the current target. signed, Rosguill talk 18:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete There is no apparent relationship between Turtukiña and ALU. Lambtron talk 20:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This redirect only makes sense in the Basque Wikipedia, I created it here by mistake. --Xabier Armendaritz(talk) 22:08, 29 May 2019 (UTC) [P. S.: I wasn't aware that I had not created the redirect in the Basque Wikipedia but in the English one until I have read the note about it on my talk page — thanks for the heads-up!][reply]
In that case, given that Xabier_Armendaritz was the creator of the redirect I am going to file a WP:G7 CSD request for this redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 21:35, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:HOL[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially confusing, could easily go to Wikipedia:Wikipedihol InvalidOS (talk) 18:02, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - presumably refers to "HOLiday" but not obviously. Zero hits in 30 days, no incoming links except from discussions like this one. Safe to let it go. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:18, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Brandon Durden[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

player retired Joeykai (talk) 17:59, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - having retired without meeting our notability standards for inclusion in an article, there is currently no information on this person anywhere on Wikipedia. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Starlin Peralta[edit]

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 deleted per WP:G7. -- Tavix (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

player no longer has a section Joeykai (talk) 17:12, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Daigaku[edit]

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 Move Daigaku (disambiguation) over redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 19:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"daigaku" means "university" in Japanese. List of universities in Japan is a more useful target. feminist (talk) 15:51, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Really glad I put out the call to the WikiProject. Thank you! --BDD (talk) 14:33, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well done: redirecting to a DAB does look to be obviously the best way. (I sort of wonder what propels people to type "Daigaku" into WP, but there you are.) Imaginatorium (talk) 03:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Vte[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 10#Template:Vte

Dublin Bus (No. 54A)[edit]

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. kingboyk (talk) 16:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

there is no specific information on bus no. 54A in article Dublin Bus. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:57, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Unopposed, but the decade-old AfD closed as merge, and the history suggests content was merged, so this could use some discussion before summary deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:46, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As far as I can tell this was redirected without merging any content about a week after the AfD closed. If that's the case then there is no reason to keep the page history. PC78 (talk) 06:53, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:XC[edit]

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 Wikipedia:User access levels#Extendedconfirmed. I'm tempted to mark that page as {{historical}}. I note that the lead coordinator is blocked, as is one of the assistant coordinators and the other has 7 edits in the last year, and the previous year was not much more prolific. -- Tavix (talk) 20:43, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XC redirecting to Christianity Coordinators is not the obvious destination as indicated by the hat note concerning extended confirmed users. I suggest either retargeting it to the more important destination or deleting it. Trialpears (talk) 21:40, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep this redirect has existed as a shortcut to the current target for 11 years, and we should always be very cautious about retargetting long-standing shortcuts because doing so runs the risk of breaking the context of discussions past, present and future (as people familiar with where a shortcut goes will rarely check each time they use it). That said this does not seem to be used outside of lists of shortcuts, but it does get a consistent level of use. The hatnote does not imply that the current target is not the obvious destination, simply that it is not the only plausible destination (compare WP:V) and ambiguity of shortcut redirects is very common and not at all problematic. We cannot know how many people are using this to reach the current target and how many are looking for the access level, but page view statistics for the period from 1 July 2015 (the earliest available) to January 2019 do not show any significant change in frequency of use (other than a single exceptional day in January 2016) at any point. I haven't found exactly when the extended confirmed access level first became available, but the RFC about the protection level initiated in July 2016 described it as "new", so July 2015 is likely to be significantly before it. The consistent level of use and the lack of any obvious peaks corresponding to significant community interest in the protection level (e.g. the July-August 2016 RfC) suggest that the current target remains the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not clear there's a good consensus here or that any of the arguments are clearly stronger than the others
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Resident Evil redirects[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Various fictional elements that aren't mentioned in any article including the target. Del Lago does have an entry at Del Lago which should be removed. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:45, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mr. Fourth Quarter[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 19:22, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this term in target article, and no evidence this is a common nickname. Pageview stats show essential no hits. —Bagumba (talk) 19:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. While this is a nickname that gets some use in reliable sources, it is not applied exclusively to any one player - it's used for/in connection with Kevin Durant, Kyle Irving*, Russell Wilson and Ben Gordon all on page 1 of a google search for the exact phrase - I didn't bother looking beyond that. If the term is mentioned in the articles about these players (I haven't looked) then it might make a good disambiguation page, but not in the absence of that. *the deleted article at this title seems to have been about a different person Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per above, but barring that retarget to comeback (sports) where the concept (though not necessarily about a particular player's performance) is discussed in general. - PaulT+/C 18:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The problem with both disambiguation and retargetting is that this phrase is not mentioned in any player's article, nor in Comeback (sports), nor anywhere else on Wikipedia that I've found. Without a mention someone who doens't know what this means will just be confused. Thryduulf (talk) 01:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • MOS comment We shouldn't disambiguate if there is no mention of the term in the dab entries. Per MOS:NICKNAME, they should only be mentioned in articles if the nickname is frequently used: Nicknames and other aliases included must be frequently used by reliable sources in reference to the subject. For example, a sports journalist's one-off reference to a player as "the Atlanta panther" in purple prose does not constitute a nickname, and treating it as one is original research. This is not the case with Mr. Fourth Quarter.—Bagumba (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this needed to be relisted, but since it was, delete per everyone. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:26, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

40 nm[edit]

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. For what it's worth, the article has a brief mention: In 2008, TSMC moved on to a 40 nm process. -- Tavix (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems misleading, I'd suggest deletion unless someone can provide a justifiable rationale. signed, Rosguill talk 22:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hartung Hirschfeld[edit]

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. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) signed, Rosguill talk 17:17, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any indication that this was a name used by Hartwig Hirschfeld, nor is Hartung an equivalent to Hartwig to my knowledge. signed, Rosguill talk 22:46, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen him referred to as such at e.g. [6], [7], and [8] — it seems to be a common misspelling. Kyuko (talk) 22:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relist was unnecessary, I think Kyuko's evidence justifies the redirect. Withdrawing nomination. signed, Rosguill talk 17:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Manterrupting[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 7#Manterrupting

Yunzhong Commandery[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:47, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The redirects are all names of subdivisions in the Han dynasty 2000 years ago, while the targets are modern cities/districts randomly chosen by the editor. Most target articles have no connection whatsoever with the Han-era subdivisions, nor do they mention the commanderies. I was already working on this series of articles when the editor rushed in to "claim" all the rest with redirects. It's not possible to expand all of them any time soon, so I suggest these misleading redirects be deleted for now. Esiymbro (talk) 09:14, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Could use some discussion, given this is a bulk nomination. I've now tagged all the redirects.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Antlion Guard[edit]

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 as unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No coverage in Wikipedia since Creatures of Half-Life was turned into a redirect as a result of an AfD. There are other redirects that have this same problem as a consequence of that AfD, which I might deal with by using this one as a precedent. —Xezbeth (talk) 09:24, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Reno, Arizona[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 7#Reno, Arizona

Elder Scrolls fictional element redirects[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minor fictional elements that have no mention in the target article or anywhere else on Wikipedia, except for Markarth and Winterhold that have passing mentions in other articles. Not enough to justify a redirect however. —Xezbeth (talk) 08:44, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out there's about a hundred more of these things pointing to The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. It will take me far too long to nominate them all so I'll just use the ones here as precedent to deal with them later. —Xezbeth (talk) 09:14, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

NV 805[edit]

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. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Onel5969 TT me 19:28, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.... did I miss something? Can't find any reference to a Nevada road 805 on the target page. Onel5969 TT me 08:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned in one sentence. I lived in the area at the time and can vouch that the road was briefly proposed with the route number 805 during the early planning phase and that fact was mentioned by a newspaper article or two. So there is some value in keeping the redirect should someone stumble on those newspaper articles. However, as this was only a brief proposal, that was never acted upon, it would be difficult for me to argue to keep this redirect were it nominated for deletion. Dave (talk) 16:23, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is mentioned and bolded in the history section. Also note the article was originally created as “Nevada State Route 805” because of the context Dave mentioned, before I moved it to “USA Parkway”—it is now at “Nevada State Route 439” to reflect the actual number assigned after NDOT took over the roadway. Given this, I see no reason to remove the redirect. LJ ↗ 17:10, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Catholic Church and deism[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 7#Catholic Church and deism

Annihilation of the Otomi of Tecoac[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect was made by banned User:Accopulocrat Poundofdonuts is the the sock puppet of Accopulocrat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Bans_apply_to_all_editing,_good_or_bad Jack90s15 (talk) 02:41, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete purely on the basis of this being an implausible search term - anyone interested in the topic will search for Otomi, which is why I merged the content there. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:12, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Virginia Crosbie[edit]

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 resolved. -- Tavix (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To make space for Draft: Virginia_Crosbie. Edit: I think I've messed up and this should be on WP:RMT and I'm very confused. Sorry about this but can someone help me? TryKid (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - another editor marked it for speedy deletion as an uncontroversial page move (G13), which is the easier way to go about this, TryKid. Onel5969 TT me 09:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
G7 was declined but that's the wrong criteria, it should have been G6 ("Deleting redirects or other pages blocking page moves"). So you could try again, or just list it at WP:RMT. PC78 (talk) 06:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, looks like someone else has G7'd it. You should be free to move the draft into mainspace now. PC78 (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_29&oldid=906767568"