Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 13[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 13, 2021.

The weather in Chesterfield[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term (only 7 hits for all of 2020), ambiguous since there are multiple places by this name (Chesterfield is a dab page). (t · c) buidhe 23:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Hopelessly ambiguous - 13 full title matches on the DAB page. Narky Blert (talk) 09:17, 15 February 2021 (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.

Pluvialas[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects originate from a 2007 AfD, but are not currently mentioned at the target (though "pollencreeper", apparently a variation on "pollenpeeper", is). 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 23:21, 13 February 2021 (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.

Edit count[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 accept draft. --BDD (talk) 19:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only edit count mentioned at the target dab page is the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject edit counters in the hatnote. This should either be retargeted to Wikipedia:Edit count or, if deemed inappropriate as a XNR, deleted. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd be willing to bet that enough sources could be found to create an article on Wikipedia edit counts. BD2412 T 20:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's also Edit counts, redirecting to the same target. – Uanfala (talk) 20:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both Edit count and Edit counts. --Un assiolo (talk) 20:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete.--Ḥdiddān 21:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I've added Edit counts to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget to Wikipedia:Edit count. Both redirects have been deleted and recreated multiple times as Crossnamespace redirects, but the only discussion there has been is Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 October 23#Edit count → Wikipedia:Edit count (the plural has never been discussed afaict). @Titoxd and Risker: are the only users who participated there who are still active. The number of recreations (about 20 over both redirects I think) and the 76 page views they got (combined) last year strongly indicate that these redirects are desired and useful. Neither target isn't perfect, but in the absence of anything that is either one is very significantly more helpful than the search results which (excluding these redirects) find nothing relevant on the first page. Thryduulf (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget per Thryduulf. If there was an existing article about edit counts (not counters, which is too broad a topic), I'd say a hatnote would be sufficient. I'm certain experienced Wikipedians don't realize how often the topic of edit counts is discussed onwiki, and for newer users, figuring out where to find an explanation is very difficult. In many cases, we use hatnotes if there's an article with a very similar topic, but in the absence of an article, I'm inclined to stick to the redirect method. The more I look at it, I think the suggested retarget is the best outcome for now. Risker (talk) 04:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:10, 13 February 2021 (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.

Muslim cinema[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 List of Islam-related films. signed, Rosguill talk 17:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, "Muslim cinema" should have its own article, provided that there are sources to sustain it. But in the meantime, this redirect is unexpected and obscures the fact that we don't actually have an article on Muslim cinema, so it should be deleted. Rublov (talk) 18:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: In looking at the page history, I've realized that Muslim cinema was formerly a real article, before it was turned into a redirect. I still think the creation of that redirect was in error, but the original article was low-quality and almost entirely unsourced, so I don't think it should just be restored either. Not sure what the proper procedure is in this case. Rublov (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Retarget to List of Islam-related films. This seems to be be the most relevant result I could find, but I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to target this to a list of films. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Retarget to List of Islam-related films as the current most plausible target, with no prejudice against creating a more thorough article in the future. I can see the WP:REDLINK argument, however... BlackholeWA (talk) 14:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisiting for further consideration of the retarget proposal vs. redlinking.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:10, 13 February 2021 (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.

Matthew Gisborne[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. signed, Rosguill talk 17:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful XNR; a reader does not learn anything about the person from the list at the category. There is a mention at List of English cricketers (1826–1840)#G, so I suggest retargeting there. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further consideration of disambiguation vs deletion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:06, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, I think J947 has it right here. There are multiple Matthew Gisbornes but they're all extremely minor mentions, it would be a very weak disambiguation page and the search results seem preferable. ~ mazca talk 13:57, 23 February 2021 (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 Yogis[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 List of Hindu gurus and sants. Since it was suggested there has been agreement that this is preferable to deletion. It's not a perfect match given the disorganisation of the list, but clearly a closely-related topic with significant overlap. ~ mazca talk 18:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no list of Yogis in the article 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (talk) 11:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. There was a short and ill-chosen list in the article some years ago, but it was obviously problematic (who to select of the untold number; was it for humans, enlightened beings, semi-divine figures, or indeed gods? - clearly a mixture was undesirable and confusing) and was rightly removed. The redirect serves no useful function. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per both above. Thryduulf (talk) 12:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete currently a misleading redirect. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 18:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Hindu gurus and sants, which also lists notable yogis, and which seems to be where the content that used to be in the targeted subsection was moved to at some point. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 20:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Hindu gurus and sants per Ivanvector since it lists several yogis. A7V2 (talk) 09:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:01, 13 February 2021 (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.

Клаксвик[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED. No particular affinity with Serbian or any language using Cyrillic letters. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:56, 13 February 2021 (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.

BringBackGranadaTalkTV[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable meme, apparently originating from the same minor content creator referenced in the BlakeIsHere RFD below. (See Special:Diff/1006517055.) Not mentioned in target article. 10 GHits. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 20:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I removed the section of the article earlier because it was unsourced, undue and seemed to be promoting a DeviantArt account. Not a notable meme. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2021 (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.

MAGA Patriot Party[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 23#MAGA Patriot Party

BlakeIsHere vs. Sky News[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article. Google brings up nothing helpful for this term in quotes. "BlakeIsHere" appears to be a quite minor content creator. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 20:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy G1/G3/G11 Nonsense redirect, google doesn't turn up any results related to this phrase. Appears to be an attempt at promotion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2021 (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.

Peppa is Fucking Dead[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. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Google search shows that this phrase has been used precisely seven times on indexed pages, all in relation to one or two memes. Delete. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 20:41, 13 February 2021 (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.

Baron samedit[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 23#Baron samedit

LoL: Dominion[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 22#LoL: Dominion

Scoutmaster Robbie[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Scoutmaster Robbie

Adsf[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Adsf

Suffragists[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Suffragists

Xfdisk[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) CycloneYoris talk! 00:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:57, 13 February 2021 (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.

Painted Game Term[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 soft delete. Thryduulf (talk) 20:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As with #Painted! below, no mention at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:51, 13 February 2021 (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.

Boah[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Boah

Kibitzeach[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. Thryduulf (talk) 20:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not explained at target or anywhere else on-wiki. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:33, 13 February 2021 (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.

Kilovh[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 soft delete. Thryduulf (talk) 20:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target or anywhere on Wikipedia; created by a user with the same name as the page title. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:32, 13 February 2021 (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.

Painted![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. Thryduulf (talk) 20:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target and highly ambiguous. painted redirects to paint, which is not a plausible target for this redirect in my opinion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:29, 13 February 2021 (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.

Countryhumans[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. Thryduulf (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense redirect from a fandom to a political ideology. Either create an article (if the sources about it are reliable) or delete. Purplneon486 (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete with extreme prejudice. Non-notable fandom. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Countryhumans. No relation to Neo-Nazism or Pakistan. Nonsense. — Chrisahn (talk) 16:03, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy G1. Nonsense redirect. From what I can tell it seems to be a bit like Polandball but with people? No connection to Neo-Nazism or Pakistan, and not mentioned at the target article. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy G1/G3 per above. Think I'll go have a word with the redirect's creator about some of their recent edits... -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 20:36, 13 February 2021 (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.

Kekekekeke[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Kekekekeke

Chaungtha language[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. Thryduulf (talk) 19:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of "Chaungtha" in the article, and Glottolog indicates there is no assured link. I'd like to put a hatnote at Chaungtha, Pathein saying "Chaungtha redirects here. For the language see ..." but I can't do that unless the nominated redirect is legitimate. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete yeah, this redirect is iffy. I see the idea but there's no reason to keep it. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 13:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep of course. Why create needless redlinks that will just need to be recreated? Your link says it all -- Chaungtha is a variety of Arakanese. This is a former ISO language name and code that existed for decades (at least 40 yrs) before being retired. So, unless you want to write a dedicated article on Chaungtha, it needs to rd to the correct article. Also, it would be weird to have a rd for the code but not for the name.
We should probably have that hatnote at 'Chaungtha, Pathein'. The rd is legitimate, as the link above shows. — kwami (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2021 (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.

Rottenella[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 21#Rottenella

"Right to choose" 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 Retarget the first three to Abortion debate#Terminology, Keep the 5th and 6th and retarget the 4th to Freedom of choice. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator comment) Corrected apparent mixup of "4th" and "5th", to reflect the close that Thryduulf actually implemented. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 01:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All prior XfDs for this page:


The first three of these mean the same thing and should thus all point to the same target. (The third is an unusual search term, but a redirect has existed at this title for 17 years (with an article having been there for a few months prior). If anyone does move to delete it, color me neutral in that regard.)

The fourth raises the question of whether "right to choose" is still distinctively associated with abortion when the word "woman's" is removed. In my view it still is. ("Man's right to choose" is only mentioned as a section at Child support.) If it isn't, though, it should match Freedom to choose, which is included here for the sake of completeness.

Of the three targets used by the four "right to" redirects, I think that Abortion-rights movements is preferable to Abortion debate as more specific, but the #Terminology section-link used in Right to choose is an even better fit. I therefore propose to keep Freedom to choose; (re)target the rest to Abortion-rights movements § Terminology -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 06:41, 13 February 2021 (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.

Omos[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 Jordan Omogbehin. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Target repeatedly changed to and from Amos / Jordan Omogbehin. Omogbehin is a wrestler using Omos as a ring name. There is disagreement over the title of his article (there is an RMs pending to move it to Omos (wrestler)), but regardless of what that article is called it looks like the wrestler using the name is the obvious target - not Amos which, not surprisingly, is filled with things that start with "A", not "O". MB 04:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Jordan Omogbehin. The redirect Omos was created in 2004 for unknown reasons, and prior to the wrestler taking it as his ring name, this would be a candidate for deletion. probably should have been changed to Omo. -GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 04:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rationale in the edit summaries of Omos are a bit odd. Clearly there is concensus at least on Talk:Jordan Omogbehin that it should target either Jordan Omogbehin or Omo and not the current target. My preference would be to retarget to Jordan Omogbehin as the only topic which is a plural and isn't an acronym, with a hatnote to Omo. Second preference is to retarget to Omo. Definitely don't keep the current target (but could put it as a "see also" on Omo if people feel that is necessary). A7V2 (talk) 09:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Abstain. I don't even remember this edit. Let consensus prevail. - Gilgamesh (talk) 15:35, 13 February 2021 (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.

Shaking Cup Man[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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep44. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another of Robbie's disguises that's not mentioned at the target, and a Google search brings up irrelevant results. Delete this, or alternatively, retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep43 44, unless a justification can be provided as to why it's at its current target. Regards, SONIC678 03:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I must've missed it. Thanks for pointing out the correct episode. Regards, SONIC678 17:04, 13 February 2021 (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.

Purple legend[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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep43. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is another Robbie Rotten disguise mentioned at List of LazyTown episodes#ep43 but not at the target. I'm thinking we should either delete these, or if they're kept, retarget them to that place (or wherever else appropriate). Regards, SONIC678 03:24, 13 February 2021 (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.

Rob R. Robley[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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep43. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:48, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's another Robbie Rotten disguise that isn't mentioned at the target (but it is at List of LazyTown episodes#ep43, where I think these should be retargeted if they're kept), but its name is also ambiguous with real people (especially for the one without the middle initial, for which a Google search brings up some of these irrelevant people). Regards, SONIC678 03:20, 13 February 2021 (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.

H. R. Rottenein[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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep42. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another of Robbie's disguises that's not mentioned at the target. Either delete or retarget those to List of LazyTown episodes#ep42 where Professor Rottenein is mentioned. Regards, SONIC678 03:15, 13 February 2021 (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.

Roberto the Ringmaster[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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep41. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of Robbie Rotten's disguises that's not mentioned at the target article, and also kinda ambiguous. I'm leaning towards deletion here, but if it's kept, it should be retargeted to List of LazyTown episodes#ep41 where it's mentioned. Regards, SONIC678 03:10, 13 February 2021 (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.

More of Robbie Rotten's disguises[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 Withdrawn by nominator. It's probably best to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. (non-admin closure) Regards, SONIC678 02:53, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are some more of Robbie Rotten's disguises, which aren't mentioned in the target article. Even though I'm leaning towards deleting them, if kept they should be retargeted wherever appropriate (the respective episodes in which they appear at the list of episodes, perhaps?). Regards, SONIC678 01:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Sonic678: I think it's best to split up this nomination, as some of the redirects seem significantly more appropriate than others. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 02:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@J947: OK, got it. I'll split this thing up. Regards, SONIC678 02:52, 13 February 2021 (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.

Chef Robert[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. Thryduulf (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is meant to refer to one of Robbie Rotten's disguises, but it's pretty ambiguous and can refer to any chef named Robert (several of whom have Wikipedia pages). Plus, Robert doesn't seem to list any of the people mentioned as chefs, so I'm not sure about retargeting there. As such, I suggest we either delete this or retarget it wherever appropriate. Regards, SONIC678 00:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete; I think this search landing page, while not perfect, does a much better job of disambiguating than any article in this scenario. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 01:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JP947. A7V2 (talk) 09:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JP947. Ambiguous name and the search results are reasonable. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:01, 21 February 2021 (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/2021_February_13&oldid=1008583268"