Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 28[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 28, 2019.

Yugoslav Milicija[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) 00:17, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is half a WP:FORRED: "milicija" is Croatian while "Yugoslav" is English. I don't see how this is a particularly useful combination; if the redirect were entirely in Croatian, it would be different, but since it is half English, its utility is likely diminished. I thus suggest deletion. ComplexRational (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why does every redirect need to be speedily deleted outside the criteria? Geolodus (talk) 16:57, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom as an implausible redirect due to the mixing of two languages. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Croatian was spoken in Yugoslavia, although the state had no official language. Geolodus (talk) 16:57, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Geolodus:, Yugoslavia had an official language, but none at federal level. Serbo-Croatian was official in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia (with Vojvodina and Kosovo) and Montenegro. Slovene was official in Slovenia, Macedonian was official in Macedonia, Albanian was official in Kosovo, while Hungarian had some special status in Hungarian speaking towns in Vojvodina. However, in Croatia the official language was by the 1974 constitution "Croatian or Serbian". --Koreanovsky (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's why I wrote "the state", meaning the upper-level government. Geolodus (talk) 06:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ComplexRational: Hey! Sorry for the late reply! ;) If you say it is outside the criteria of the English Wikipedia, feel free to delete it! There is a reason why I made this redirect. The article was originally named "Yugoslav Militsiya" which is absolutely wrong, since the word "Militsiya" is the Russian transcription for "милиция", the Russian law inforcement until 2011 (If I am not wrong). As you can see, I did it to show that the term "Militsiya" is totally wrong when it comes to Yugoslavia and the Yugoslav Militia (Milicija) since it is not comparable with the Soviet and/or Russian one. Greetings, Koreanovsky (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Koreanovsky: Thanks for the explanation. I cannot delete it myself as I am not an admin, and even if I were, this redirect doesn't meet any of the speedy deletion criteria. It is best to discuss here in cases like this, especially when different opinions may come into play. ComplexRational (talk) 21:50, 4 October 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.

ESPN MLB Baseball[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 ESPN Major League Baseball. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that the primary topic is ESPN Major League Baseball, especially since "MLB Baseball" does not seem to be specific shorthand for the video game. If it is being searched in this way, the more intuitive target seems to be the more generic article, so I'm proposing a retarget there. ComplexRational (talk) 23:40, 28 September 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.

Lede improvement team[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 Speedily Deleted. By Anthony Appleyard. (non-admin closure) James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 13:52, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; unlikely search target (1view/90d) –xenotalk 23:05, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as a relatively recently created cross-namespace redirect to a small WikiProject with just 14 listed participants. The redirect has no significant incoming links, few pageviews, and no useful history. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as the creator I'd be fine with this.  DiscantX 02:17, 30 September 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.

Discendo discimus[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) 00:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect. Both titles in Latin, the target is a disambiguation page for the phrase translating to "By teaching, we learn", the redirect translates to "By learning, we learn" which is rather different and doesn't really pertain to anything on the dab page. Wug·a·po·des​ 20:46, 28 September 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.

Palestine mountain gazelle[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. There is consensus that this is an appropriate redirect. Whether the redirect should be mentioned in the lead can be determined on the appropriate talk page. Wug·a·po·des​ 21:38, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The target has nothing to do with this redirect. This gazelle is distributed in the whole Middle East and I didn't find any scholar mention of it as Palestine Gazelle Arthistorian1977 (talk) 17:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is part of the latest disruption by SD to create disruption in articles that have nothing to do with the IP conflict. The mountain gazelle is called the mountain gazelle and there is one article that calls it "Palestine Gazelle" and he is trying to now label that, when IUCN and others don't. We should not be changing articles, and certainly not leads for disruptive purposed. But certainly this is not a redirect that people would use to get to this article. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "Palestine mountain gazelle" is a real name for Mountain gazelle (Gazella gazella): The Guardian:[1], The Davidson Institute of Science Education: [2], Antelopes: North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia p 100 :

[3], Ramat Handaiv: [4], Bovids of the World p 129 [5]. This shows that the name is well established and used in a long list of reliable sources. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:50, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep without commenting on whether it's an appropriate inclusion in the target's lead, if this is a name that has been used in RS to refer to the animal then a redirect is appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 03:56, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rosguill. It is unclear from the sources whether this is simply an alternate common name for the mountain gazelle or a subspecies (or the two possibilities are being conflated), but in either case a redirect to mountain gazelle is appropriate. Rlendog (talk) 15:11, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 14:30, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. In one way, redirects are different from most other content: they don't require scholarly or other expert backing to exist. All that matters is whether people are likely to use a string to search for something: if the string commonly represents something, it should be a redirect to it. The provided links demonstrate that "Palestine mountain gazelle" commonly represents the animal covered in the Mountain gazelle article, so regardless of the reliability of the links, this is a good redirect. Nyttend (talk) 02:34, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - well-established common name. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:59, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 28 September 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.

Fdf.dk[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) Steel1943 (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SPAM The Banner talk 14:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 28 September 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.

Other Stuff Exists[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) 00:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; unlikely search target (1 view past 90 days) –xenotalk 18:08, 28 September 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.

Godot3D[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 speedily deleted (R3) by User:Ritchie333. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:01, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Seems implausible, created by a user known for implausible and/or ambiguous redirects that have been discussed here. 12 page views since creation. TheSandDoctor Talk 16:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. GaɱingFørFuɲ365 09:14, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 09:40, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Godot is both 2D and 3D. This title is erroneous. flowing dreams (talk page) 10:21, 30 September 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.

T:motu[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 speedily deleted (CSD R3) by User:Anthony Bradbury. -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:27, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous/unnecessary redirect to Template:Masters of the Universe created by a user known for making ambiguous/unnecessary redirects. I would speedy delete as WP:CSD#R3, but don't consider this "recent" enough to satisfy the criteria. TheSandDoctor Talk 16:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete: as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 09:39, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the nominator stated, this is not recently created and thus does not meet the criterion. Geolodus (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedily delete per nom. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 17:39, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom as an unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. I think this is certainly recent enough for R3. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:27, 29 September 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.

Sonic1996[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) 00:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect/ambiguous. I would R3, but this was not a "recent" creation. TheSandDoctor Talk 16:15, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Implausible. Sergecross73 msg me 02:19, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Sergecross73. There are more Sonic the Hedgehog video games released in 1996 than just one. GaɱingFørFuɲ365 09:10, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 09:39, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 03:04, 1 October 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.

Sonic2006[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 10#Sonic2006

The Moaner[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) 00:21, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication in the article why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:55, 28 September 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.

List of Wikipedia essays[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 10#List of Wikipedia essays

Don't revert due solely to no consensus[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) 00:22, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; unlikely target (0 views in 90 days) –xenotalk 13:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. Wug·a·po·des​ 19:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedily delete per nom. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 17:40, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect to an essay (not even guideline or policy). The redirect has no significant incoming links, few pageviews, and no useful page history. -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the redirect, and while you're at it, delete the essay too. In the interest of being pleasant, I only point out that they are "problematic", so to speak. flowing dreams (talk page) 10:25, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 03:05, 1 October 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.

Academic boosterism[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) 00:22, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; unlikely target (2 views in last 90 days). –xenotalk 12:56, 28 September 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.

Most common Wikipedia faux pas[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) James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 23:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; unlikely search target (16 views in 90 days) –xenotalk 12:53, 28 September 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.

Previously deleted non-standard foreign names for Wikipedia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 10#Previously deleted non-standard foreign names for Wikipedia

Lantsong and Lanfung[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. --BDD (talk) 20:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear what the relation to the target is: not mentioned at the target, and an internet search didn't turn up anything meaningful. Delete if a justification cannot be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 11:45, 28 September 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.

Clin d'œil[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. --BDD (talk) 20:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, I can't figure out what the relation is. An internet search returns myriad unrelated results. If a justification cannot be provided, then I suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 11:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I heard that this is the last word by Moreau, but I do not know which Moreau? --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 07:07, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 09:21, 4 October 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.

192.168.10.1[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) 00:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No special significance, at least two of these seem to be obvious jokes. Note that I'm not nominating 192.168.0.3, as that one seems to have some actual significance signed, Rosguill talk 11:33, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • My apologies, most likely I had been pretty bored that day and thought that a little bit of prank would be harmless. For 192.168.10.1 though, I vote for keep since it is also a common choice for NAT router manufacturers for the default gateway's IP address as well. [6] --Luke1337 (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and trout per Luke1337. Maybe keep the first one. Wug·a·po·des​ 21:00, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as unlikely search terms. There are 65,536 IP addresses of the form 192.168.x.x and only a couple of them (e.g. 192.168.0.1) are significant. Of course others are used but Wikipedia is not a directory where company phone numbers redirect to the articles about each company, and similarly there is no reason to pick a couple of IPs for redirects. I would add 192.0.34.166 and 192.168.1.11 along with 192.168.10.1 which has no special significance—someone searching Wikipedia for that IP will not find anything useful at private network. Johnuniq (talk) 02:01, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as well as 192.168.0.3, 192.168.0.2, 192.168.0.1, 192.168.1.1, and 192.168.1.11. These are rarely used and we have a search engine for a reason. flowing dreams (talk page) 11:55, 29 September 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.

SteamID[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) 00:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned on target page. Lordtobi (✉) 11:08, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete These redirects strike me as someone trying to find technical information concerning Steam IDs (e.g. appropriate names, changing passwords, etc.) that we obviously can't provide here at Wikipedia. My question is this: Why is someone trying to find Steam IDs or information on them on Wikipedia? I don't think there's a policy-compliant answer to that question. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 04:59, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Redirects are supposed lead the readers to knowledge, not confusion. SteamID is not alternative title for Steam, but rather a subtopic of it, on which the article has no information. flowing dreams (talk page) 10:40, 30 September 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.

Valve Cyber Café Program[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) 00:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned on target page. Lordtobi (✉) 11:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I do remember this doomed program, but if this article has no information on it, I don't think keeping this emotional memento does anyone any good. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:20, 1 October 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.

Naissancee[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) 00:26, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A game released on Steam, just like 300,000+ others. The topic has nothing to do with Steam and a redirect there is misleading. Also not mentioned on the target page. Lordtobi (✉) 11:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as WP:COSTLY and per RDEL10. Wug·a·po·des​ 20:50, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: This redirect, as WP:RDEL:#5 puts it, makes no sense. Redirecting the title of a video game to the title of its distribution platform is like redirecting the name of famous person to Shoe on the pretext that said person wore shoes. flowing dreams (talk page) 10:45, 30 September 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.

Steam (company)[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 Steam (disambiguation)#Organisations. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search target; Steam is not a company. Lordtobi (✉) 10:59, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per Champion below Wug·a·po·des​ 15:42, 2 October 2019 (UTC) Keep Not everyone knows that steam is not a company; useful search term for people unfamiliar with the software or business organization. Wug·a·po·des​ 21:03, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Steam_(disambiguation)#Organisations, or if you prefer, simply to the dab without the section, to address Wugapodes' concerns. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:29, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Steam (disambiguation) § Organisations: User:Champion's idea sounds great to me. There are actual companies out there that are called "Steam", and Valve, Inc. or its Steam service, are not among them. On the whole, I don't think it is a good idea to make things easier for the misguided people at the cost of confusing the informed ones. In fact, I usually find that it is easier to correct mistakes when the accuracy is maintained in everything else. flowing dreams (talk page) 11:03, 2 October 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.

Steam (software[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) 00:28, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search target with missing parenthesis on disambiguator. A version with all parentheses present exists making this redirect redundant. Lordtobi (✉) 10:59, 28 September 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.

Steam (Software)[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) 00:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search target with upper-case disambiguator. The same redirect with a properly cased disambiguator already exists. Lordtobi (✉) 10:51, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Not everyone knows our disambiguation MOS so it aids linking and searching. Tag with {{R from alternative disambiguation}} or {{R from alternative capitalization}}. Wug·a·po·des​ 20:51, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Wugapodes, as presented in my nom, the same redirect already exists where the disambiguator is in lower-case. A search using Wikipedia's search system will yield the exact same result with and without the redirect. From the comments below I now know to link to WP:RDAB for such discussions. Regards, Lordtobi (✉) 14:43, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. We have around 6,000 Category:Redirects from miscapitalisations. Most if not all are plausible search terms (we don't require redirects to be likely search terms, nor should we, as we have thousands of articles that no one ever searches for); many, including this one, are also frequently linked to from other articles. Also, it's polite to notify the creator of a redirect, and any other major contributors, when nominating it for deletion. See WP:RFD#HOWTO. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 22:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Arms & Hearts, note that the category you linked applies to redirects where the title has an alternative capitalisation, not the disambiguator. From the comments below I now know to link to WP:RDAB for such discussions. As for the creator ping, I usually have this enabled in Twinkle and believed that it does this automatically for me. It does not seem to be the case, however, and I double-check that it does so in the future. Regards, Lordtobi (✉) 14:43, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is a textbook WP:RDAB scenario since the disambiguator is unnecessarily capitalized. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Steel1943 (WP:RDAB), as a redirect from an unlikely (and incorrect) capitalization of an alternative disambiguated form of the title. The few links noted by A&H have been fixed. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:14, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    They haven't been "fixed" as, per an established guideline that editors who wish to contribute usefully at RfD really ought to know about, they weren't broken. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:05, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Putting aside the semantics of "fixed" versus "broken", the fact is that none of the reasons listed at WP:NOTBROKEN to not bypass a redirect apply in this case. However, the guideline does call for "[s]pelling errors and other mistakes [to] be corrected", and a miscapitalization falls under "other mistakes". I am well aware that it is generally inappropriate to edit articles solely for the purpose of bypassing a redirect, so all of my edits included other, more substantive changes. -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:57, 4 October 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.

Dry rice[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 Rice. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 13:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading, as dry rice in English generally just means uncooked rice. I would suggest either deletion or redirecting to Rice. signed, Rosguill talk 10:41, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to rice per nom. Wug·a·po·des​ 20:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • retarget for now. Would have been useful to link at Grain drying had that article have a dedicated section for drying rice. --Lenticel (talk) 03:10, 1 October 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.

National Awami League[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) 19:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We have articles for the Awami League and the National Awami Party. However, neither of these parties appears to be called the "National Awami League", at least based on the article contents. If I'm correct that this is a misnomer that could equally refer to either party, I would suggest that we delete this redirect and let the internal search engine do its work. signed, Rosguill talk 10:28, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Probably a good candidate to delete per WP:XY. We could probably redirect it to the more trafficked of the two pages and add a hatnote since I could imagine this being confusing for readers unfamiliar with the difference. Wug·a·po·des​ 21:06, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deepak G Goswami, the creator of the redirect, is the only editor who has written the name National Awami League. Perhaps they can say what sources use the name and explain why it should redirect to National Awami Party. The sources cited in B. M. Kutty (the only article where National Awami League is used) speak of the Pakistan Awami League and the National Awami Party (NAP), never of a National Awami League. --Worldbruce (talk) 06:18, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom/WP:XY. --BDD (talk) 20:29, 8 October 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.

Portal:Pondicherry[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) 00:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect to an excessively broad target. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:24, 28 September 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.

Ministry of Science and Computerisation[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) 00:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, does not seem to be an alternate name in English, or a translation of the Polish name. I would suggest deletion unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 10:23, 28 September 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.

Baroque bridge[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) 00:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This title is too vague to redirect to one specific article - it could refer to any bridge in the world that is built in the baroque style Melcous (talk) 09:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete There are thousands of Baroque bridges in the world. The title is too vague to redirect only to one specific bridge. At best, it could be a disambig page.--Darwinek (talk) 15:42, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. I was thinking of suggesting Baroque architecture as a target but there is not even one mention of bridges within that article. -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:03, 29 September 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.

LrrG[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 delete. per Toddst1 — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 13:15, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too ambiguous and not mentioned in target. Most likely not a useful search term. TheSandDoctor Talk 07:40, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This abbreviation is not connected to the game in any way and serves no use to the reader. Lordtobi (✉)
  • Speedy delete as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 12:47, 28 September 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.

Groundcontrol02[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 by RHaworth. Per WP:CSD#R3. (non-admin closure) ComplexRational (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous redirect (too generic?) and not mentioned in target. TheSandDoctor Talk 07:39, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 12:46, 28 September 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.

Groundcontrol01b[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 by RHaworth. Per WP:CSD#R3. (non-admin closure) ComplexRational (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in current target (Ground Control: Dark Conspiracy). TheSandDoctor Talk 07:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as WP:CSD#R3: The editor that created this has some bizarre obsession with creating nonsensical redirects. Let's not waste any more time on this. Toddst1 (talk) 12:46, 28 September 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.

Yoshio Ishizaka[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 restore article. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 06:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 07:21, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

His main claim to fame is writing some books about the Toyota way https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AYoshio+Ishizaka&s=relevancerank&text=Yoshio+Ishizaka&ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1 . He has also been a Toyota employee since 1965. As such, I also think we should delete the redirect to Toyota.  Stepho  talk  08:58, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:44, 28 September 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.

Decision 2000[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 7#Decision 2000

1800 Scenario[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) 00:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what these are supposed to mean. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:38, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I don't know that any of these terms are legitimate references to anything. I would imagine more appropriate articles would be specific US elections, not just the concept in general. Regardless, they should not all redirect to the same place if they exist at all. If there are more of these that vary by year and/or letter case, I think we should speedy delete those if this discussion results in deletion of these particular ones. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 22:00, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete as R3, these are the vaguest redirects I have seen. Completely implausible. James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 23:00, 28 September 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.

Washington (city)[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. -- Tavix (talk) 19:41, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Washington#Places as this is ambiguous. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:29, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's rather the point of Washington#Places. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:08, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Even taking into account some jurisdictions' tendency to call any populated place "city", it would be quite a stretch to call many of those places cities. --BDD (talk) 15:02, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not delete. All and all, deleting makes no sense since the redirect is at minimum a {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Steel1943 (talk) 13:13, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep we usually don't have primary topics for qualified titles but there has been consensus recently to sometimes allow it furthermore this is usually less of a problem with redirects. The other cities are much smaller than the national capital. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:14, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Eureka Lott and Wugapodes. --BDD (talk) 20:21, 8 October 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_September_28&oldid=1173366949"