Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/Yesterday

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purge

24 November 2024

Read how to nominate a redirect for discussion.

November 24

[edit]

Next Singaporean presidential election

[edit]

The 2023 presidential election has passed, and is hence no longer the next presidential election in Singapore. As there is no substantial information on the current next election to place into an article, I would like to propose instead that this page be deleted. VoicefulBread66 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantoöccipital articulations

[edit]

These pages clearly derive from typos as the character ö does not appear in latin and these terms are not used in literature, see also this discussion on one of their talk pages. I believe that if they were recent pages, they would fulfill WP:R3 from the speedy deletion criteria, but as its multiple old pages, I'm listing them here. Since entering a term with the diaresis diacritic does not seem to matter for Wikipedia search unless there is a specific page with it in its name, these redirects do not bear any value and should be deleted. The respective redirect or article pages without diacritics seem to already exist. YuniToumei (talk) 11:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page histories of Anterior atlantoöccipital membrane and Posterior atlantoöccipital membrane?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ap (ghost)

[edit]

I'm not sure this use of "Ap" is legitimate. The article refers to "The word អាប (Ahp/Aap)..." Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Big Bank Black

[edit]

Not mentioned at target. C F A 23:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Scream (Greek TV miniseries)

[edit]

Weird cross project redirect to the Greek Wikipedia. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:4786:8BAE:11B2:46A7 (talk) 22:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Under-16 and Under-17 teams

[edit]

Delete all:

Credit to Maiō T. who created a useful list of such redirects. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 18:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 NFL team redirects

[edit]

WP:TOOSOON, no relevant info at targets, making these redirects misleading. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent

[edit]

There is no evidence that a primary topic has been specified. Kolano123 (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep All of the incoming links appear to be using "Recent" in its geological definition (i.e., as a synonym for Holocene). I do think there is a point to be made about the geological definition not being the "primary topic," so to speak. But I'm hesitant to delete since the "primary" definition isn't getting wikilinked at the moment. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Appears to be used for convenience in a narrow set of articles. Thsi redirect is unlikely to cause the confusion (as we are unlikely to have an article about the word itself, which would be the primary meaning). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Викидим (talk • contribs) 22:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean delete, although I'm not unsympathetic to the cleanup that would require. Maybe someone could use AWB or a bot to automate the process, but I don't know if that's more trouble than it's worth. This seems to be used in a bunch of taxoboxes in a technical sense, but far more often, it's done better, with "Recent" as a piped link to Holocene instead of relying on the redirect (see e.g. Giraffe). I don't think it's appropriate to carve out a redirect for a technical sense of an everyday word to use like this. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NWHL profile

[edit]

Same as Template:PHF Profile. rm this redirect page. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 24. MikeVitale 16:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: once a template is deleted, all redirects to it are also deleted, so no need for RfD to get involved. Gonnym (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

King Edwards

[edit]

Ambiguous title. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:REDBIO. The group (the brothers George and Vin Edwards) is potentially notable (see [1]), but the current target doesn't contain any information on them apart from the name. Having a redlink is an incentive to create the article. Tevildo (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AR-M100390

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bus Testing and Research Center

[edit]

Quite ambiguous title not discussed at target. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Puffery inline

[edit]

{{Puffery}} now redirects to {{Promotional}}, so this should go to {{Promotional inline}}, for consistency. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrative aid

[edit]

Quite ambiguous title and not discussed at target. Seems to also have a legal meaning, based on search results. Delete as ambigous. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Field hockey at the 2028 Summer Olympics – Women's tournament

[edit]

The women's tournament is not discussed at target – misleading to the reader. Delete per WP:REDYES. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Algeria national under-16 and under-17 basketball team

[edit]

WP:XY – the under-17 team is not discussed. Also, what about the women's team for the same age bracket? Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adult Swim (Latin American TV channel).

[edit]

Implausible typo to add punctuation to the end (the period key is quite far away from the 0 key). Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season

[edit]

The season doesn't seem to have started, and the target gives very little information to the reader. Delete per WP:REDYES. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marie Stopes Myanmar

[edit]

Marie Stopes Myanmar is not discussed at the target. Seems like a WP:REDYES situation. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Taxi to Heaven

[edit]

Not seeing this used as an alternative name or translation. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator seems to be CU blocked. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 07:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ultrajectine Communion

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

The RfD previous discussion ended up on deciding on a soft redirect with my approval. However, I am having second thoughts on this Ultrajectine Communion redirect that I had bundled with Ultrajectine in this previous RfD.

I do not think a reader searching for "Ultrajectine Communion" will be satisfied with being led to the Wiktionary link to the Latin word for 'of Utrecht'. "Ultrajectine Communion" is not an used expression, and it is not used to refer to the Union of Utrecht.

Thus, I propose this redirect be deleted. Veverve (talk) 14:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mate tea (drink)

[edit]

Mate tea is also a drink, so this seems confusing. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Dutch general election

[edit]

There is no election planned in 2025 Dajasj (talk) 18:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Refine to Elections in the Netherlands#2023 general election. According to 2023 Dutch general election, that election was expected to take place in 2025 but was called early on short notice, so this is a very plausible search term. I've added a summary to the target article that explains this. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would then be more sustainable to link to redirect to 2023 Dutch general election, because the section header will be changed after the next election (and we will have forgotten about it). Also avoids duplicating content.
    More generally I disagree with redirecting with a hypothetical situation, but in this specific case it is also ambiguous because 2025 could also refer to a hypothetical snap election after 2023 (if the cabinet fell today, that would be the earliest moment). Dajasj (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The cabinet failing before the next expected election is different to the expected next election unexpectedly not happening. Sources regularly talk about the next expected election, so there will be sources from pre-July 2023 talking about the 2025 elections that people will see and search for information about. Sources since that date don't expect 2025 elections, they talk about 2028 elections in the expected manner. If elections do happen in 2025 then obviously this redirect will be correctly usurped by an article about those elections. That article will mention the circumstances and explain things for those who arrive looking for what became the 2023 election. Thryduulf (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Refine or retarget? Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kikurage

[edit]

Not sure what the path forward here is with these redirects. I recently changed the target of these redirects from Tremella fuciformis to Auricularia heimuer (while creating Kikurage) after finding that most results in English for the term "Kikurage" refer to Auricularia heimuer (specifically its use in Japanese cuisine), which would claim it to essentially be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term due to its common use in English to refer to the Japanese culinary use. However, after reviewing Tremella fuciformis, the term "Kikurage" is mentioned in the article, which is probably why the redirects Kikurage mushroom and Kikurage mushrooms targeted there. At this point, I'm not sure if "keep", "retarget" or "disambiguate" (possibly by retargeting to Wood ear?) is the best course of action here, so I'm bringing this up for discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just from reading the articles it seems that the redirects to Auricularia heimuer are correct. Tremella fuciformis is the shiro kikurage (or white kikurage) in Japanese. I don't think this is just a white form of kikurage, as it is a very different fungi (different taxonomic classes). This seems to me more akin to tiger and Tasmanian tiger where the latter are not closely related to cats. The only question is whether "Kikurage mushrooms" could be used for such different mushrooms that are used quite differently in cooking.  —  Jts1882 | talk  12:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:JEW

[edit]

Delete: Same as "MOS:ASTRO" last month. Incorrect and confusing redirects that declare this WP:PROJPAGE essay to be a part of the WP:MOS guidelines. (The page's misnaming with "/Manual of Style" instead of "/Style advice" is being addressed separately in an RM.) Deleting these shortcut will be consistent with prior deletions of "MOS:" namespace (formerly pseudo-namespace) shortcuts, and other shortcuts with "MOS" in them, that were going to wikiproject essays and the like. See also the page-creation editnotice: "This is a page in the MOS namespace, which should only be used for shortcuts to the manual of style."

The potential for mischief with such shortcuts is high, because editors who encounter them "cited" in talk-page arguments are highly likely to trust that they are MoS guidelines with the authority of community consensus acceptance, instead of being pre-WP:PROPOSAL essays by a small number of editors with little broader editorial-community input. The advice in the page might even mostly be good, but it is not (yet?) part of MoS and should not masquerade as such. Some of its wording has been a bit ranty and even leaning in an us-vs.-them direction, and ironically riddled with MoS-compliance failures (some of this I cleaned up in a particular section [2], but it needs a lot more work). The page really has not seen much substantive improvement in over a decade.

I've created a new WP:JUDAISMSTYLE shortcut for this page, and a WP:JESUSCHRIST one (in place of "MOS:JESUS" for the "Christ"-related material's anchor point in the page). The latter doesn't really doesn't belong in this page, as it is not a Judaism matter. The advice there is correct, however, and should probably be moved into a guideline page, likely WP:Manual of Style/Biography#Honorifics (as now proposed here), at which point an "MOS:" shortcut for it could be reinstituted. These seem to be the only shortcuts to this page. I'm skeptical that "JEW" in such constructions is a good idea, as it can have conflicting interpretations. But regular editors in what wikiproject might want "WP:JEW/STYLE" to go along with other subpage shortcuts they use.

 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Notified: WT:WikiProject Judaism, WT:MOS. Reason: Essay is part of that wikiproject. WT:MOS is the central place for concerns about MoS's maintenance. Did not notify Judaism, or Christianity (for MOS:JESUS), or Religion subpages of WP:Deletion_sorting, because internal essay and guideline shortcuts are not pertinent to encyclopedic coverage.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Night

[edit]

Since the now blocked sockpuppet TeapotsOfDoom nominated this redirect four days earlier and it was speedily kept per WP:BE, I'm reopening the discussion because I'm not really sure if it has a particular connection to Rihanna. The closest I could find via a Google search was part of the lyrics for "Goodnight Gotham" (which contains a sample of "Only If for a Night" by Florence and the Machine), but other than that, I'm not sure if it warrants a redirect to Rihanna's page, since 1) it's also part of the titles and/or lyrics for countless other songs and 2) it's a partial title match for multiple other articles and/or redirects (so I'm not sure where, if anywhere, is appropriate to retarget this). Delete this unless someone can provide a justification or a suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 05:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Backstory on why this redirect exists in the first place... this redirect was originally created in February 2015 when a snippet of what was then known as "A Night" was included in a Dior advertisement.
At the time, the song was unreleased (it wouldn't officially be released until January 2016 on Anti (album)), but "A Night" is the official title that the song was registered under in the ASCAP database, so that's how it was referred until the final title was revealed to be "Goodnight Gotham" upon its official release.
If kept, the target should be changed to Anti (album).
[3] RachelTensions (talk) 07:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but retarget per nom., Also create A Night (disambiguation), and use a {{Redirect}} hatnote at the album article. The DAB page should list the song, the concept "a night" (we cannot count on readers to capitalize correctly, especially since English is inconsistent and does capitalize some temporal things like days of the week), and add templated means in "See also" of looking up other works and such that start with "A Night", or have "a Night" in their title or in a subtitle. Various works will be known to some readers by partial titles or by lines/fragments from them, so this will be helpful for readers looking for "A Night ... something something, I dunno". Have One Night (disambiguation) as a see-also. I'm surprised there aren't other major works and other notable things just named "A Night"; contrast A Day (disambiguation). I suspect there are, actually, including other songs by notable artists.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A Night" is now mentioned at Anti (album). RachelTensions (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Male protagonist bingo

[edit]

Unhelpful redirect that sounds a lot like the title of some Tumblr meme. Not relavent or mentioned in the article. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RubRub

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shen an calhar

[edit]

How did this end up redirecting to WoW? Apparently, this somehow got redirected to the wrong franchise. Slight research shows that it's supposed to be from Wheel of Time. That being said, there doesn't seem to be a mention on that on there either. It appears that "The Band of the Red Hand" is a more common name for that in-universe group that the articles do mention. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of The Wheel of Time characters#Mat Cauthon, as that's also what Band of the Red Hand redirects to. Procyon117 (talk) 14:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, upon further inspection, turns out it did originally redirect to the correct franchise, but was changed for an unknown reason. Could probably just be reverted back if you're not opposed to doing so. Procyon117 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 15:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to add a mention to the correct franchise?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of North Yemen

[edit]

Ill make it an article just like how Flag of South Yemen is an article Abo Yemen✉ 11:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Normally, I'd say retarget to North Yemen (which is incorrectly marked as a dab page, more on that in a moment), which has a picture of the flag. It's short enough to accommodate information about the flag there, and if a spinout is warranted, that can happen without discussion here. However, I notice that the nominator has recently converted it from a dab page to an article (without removing the dab template or adding any sources). I don't know a thing about the history of the region and have no idea if this was reasonable or not. I'd encourage others that might to take a closer look. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you make it an article, I'd say delete. CheeseyHead (talk) 02:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moot. It being an article now, this is no longer an RfD matter but (if the condition doesn't improve) a WP:AFD or WP:SPEEDY or WP:PROD matter.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ハンマーブロス

[edit]

Not helpful for the English encyclopedia. Appears to refer to the Hammer Bros. antagonists in the Mario franchise. TNstingray (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak refine to #enemy characters. yeah, that refers to hammer bros. mario is a japanese franchise (really japanese, even, have you seen how many tanuki they can cram into a single game?), so japanese redirects are fine and dandy, though this one isn't mentioned, so meh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Narrow target per cogsan, and give the Japanese in the article. It's entirely reasonable to expect various native or non-native speakers of English who are big fans of this culture-spanning franchise to run into Japanese references to characters, so we should help them. It's pretty conventional with regard to translated media for us to give original other-language names of characters and things, especially since various academic or other sources may refer to the original-language version or a translation or both at once (and might even be constrasting them, if significant changes were made beyond name-rendering).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PKS 1402-012

[edit]

This belongs on the target list, but is just one of 8000, and isn't mentioned there. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 22:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep and tag with {{R with possibilities}}; I added PKS 1402-012 to the bulleted list at Parkes Catalogue of Radio Sources pulling a reference from the redirect page history that I thought was the most general (I didn't parse through those 33 references too thoroughly though). This doesn't quite satisfy WP:SELFRED, but there's enough in the page history to benefit another editor if this object becomes more notable. Should GalaxyBeing request deletion, I trust that decision. ― Synpath 20:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ro (antigen)

[edit]

We need an expert to determine if these are correctly targeted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the spirit of consensus, redirect to the Antigens section is also a good outcome. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 18:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget both per Synpath. The current 2nd redir is clearly and error, and there's no clear reason to not go to the section specifically about the antigens. I guess I could live with both targeting the bare Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies link, but being vague like that doesn't seem helpful to the readership.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indy HeroClix (heroclix)

[edit]

Inappropriate DAB formatting by listing it both inside and outside the parentheses. Delete as unhelpful redirect. If kept, please redirect to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series. TNstingray (talk) 18:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Yes, indeed, bring me to the page about a heroclix! Which one? The one that's a heroclix! This is a very implausible disambiguation attempt, and we don't need it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move the non-insignificant edit history to Indy Clix (which seems to be the real name per Google searches) and retartget to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series as suggested. BOZ (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 04:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chingisid

[edit]

Which articles should these redirects point to? The current situation is inconsistent and confusing.

  1. Chingisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
  2. Chingissid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
  3. Chinggisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
  4. Chinggisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
  5. Chingissids does not exist yet.
  6. Chinggissids does not exist yet.
  7. Genghisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
  8. Genghisid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
  9. Chingizid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
  10. Family tree of Genghis Khan redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan.
  11. Jochid redirects to Jochi, but Jochids redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan. (Jochid Ulus redirects to Golden Horde, that seems fine).

Personally, I am in favour of redirecting them all to Descent from Genghis Khan, as a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid is, strictly speaking, a descendant from Genghis Khan, not an earlier Borjigin, while Genghis Khan himself was obviously not a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid, but a Borjigin only. Redirecting to a section always risks link rot anyway, as section titles often change or they are rearranged, while Descent from Genghis Khan as a whole will presumably always be dedicated to this very subject. Thoughts? NLeeuw (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Not sure if I formatted this RfD correctly; I rarely do these. Do I need to tag all redirects in question? NLeeuw (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section redirects are useful in taking the reader straight to the relevent part of a large article. A link from Genghisids to Borjigin can confuse the reader, since the Borjigin article does mention Genghisids in the lead. Link rot can be reduced by linking to an anchor rather than a section name, e.g. {{anchor|Genghisids}}. An editor is likely to preserve the anchor. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nederlandse Leeuw if you meant to nominate all of them, then no. if you want to nominate multiple redirects at once, you could try this mass xfd tool. then again, it doesn't matter much, since anyone could just do whatever is deemed necessary with them after this is closed (except deleting, that's an admin thing) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Crimean Giray dynasty was referred to as the "Genghisids". Genghisid/Chinggisid literally means Borjigin dynasty. Descent from Genghis Khan is irrelevant in this context, and I don't even know why this article exists. Should be merged. "Chingisid dynasty" doesn't exist. Only two words should be redirected Chinggisids and Genghisids. Beshogur (talk) 21:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but similarly, lots of people were referred to, or referred to themselves, as "Romans", and yet histiographical convention names a great number of them "Byzantines", for example. We could theoretically always merge everything, but we'll soon end up with articles that are WP:TOOLONG (e.g. List of Roman emperors should imo have been split, because it's way too long to navigate comfortably, and we already had List of Byzantine emperors.) Although I made a plea for not splitting off a new articles named Chingisids above if there was no obvious need, I think we shouldn't underestimate the value of splitting up articles either. NLeeuw (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that Descent from Genghis Khan is a very odd article that should probably be redirected, but Chinggisid is distinct from the wider Borjigin term primarily because it was descent from Genghis, not general membership of the Borjigin, that legitimised rule in the post-Mongol world. See discussion in e.g. May 2017. While the Borjigin altan urugh (golden family) included the descendants of Genghis's brothers and of his children by concubines such as Kolgen, they were not eligible for rulership because they were not Chinggisid. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I think I see a solution. I will expand Chinggisids until it is reasonably complete; Borjigin needs also a little bit of expansion and a lot of rewriting to match current scholarship (many of its sources are half a century old and vastly out of date).
Meanwhile, Descent from Genghis Khan should be renamed and refocused onto the matter of genetic descent from Genghis—i.e. the numerous papers that have been released after the "16 million descendants" article from 2003.
All redirects seem fairly self-explanatory then, except for Jochid/Jochids which should probably redirect to Golden Horde, and Family tree of Genghis Khan which would probably work best as a redirect to Chinggisids, if I can figure out how the family tree thing works. Thanks for bringing matter up, NLeeuw. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good! Yes, I suppose renaming Descent from Genghis Khan to Genetic descent from Genghis Khan or something works better. Chinggisids can then fully focus on the reigning families of the late Middle Ages descended from Genghis or married into that family. NLeeuw (talk) 16:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I would recommend doing a search query in reliable sources to check for the WP:COMMONNAME. We better prevent endless disputes about how to spel "Chingisids" (I don't care which, but we need to pick one). NLeeuw (talk) 16:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current spelling (Chinggisids) is favoured in most reliable sources that I can see, including all cited so far in the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ngrams appears to overwhelmingly agree. I'm a bit surprised; I'm not that familiar with the double g spelling. Halperin 1987, which I use a lot for reference, has single g, single s, and some of his sources are single g, double s, but apparently they are in the minority. Ngrams shows the double g, single s spelling quickly gaining ground from the 1990s onwards. Seems like you've chosen the right title, so I guess that settles it. NLeeuw (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Proposal I think we already reached agreement, but let's make it clear.
    • Redirect no. #4 has been turned into stand-alone article Chinggisids, which is good. (Thanks to AirshipJungleman29!).
    • Redirects no. #1, #2, #3, #7, #8 and #9 should all redirect to Chinggisids.
    • If anyone ever created no. #5 or #6, they should redirect to Chinggisids as well.
    • Redirects no. #10 and no. #11 can remain unchanged.
    • A requested move (RM) for Descent from Genghis Khan could be discussed on Talk:Descent from Genghis Khan if the current title is found to be inadequate. AirshipJungleman29 could initiate such an RM if they please.
This seems to be the outcome of the discussion above, but we haven't yet formally agreed that we are going to resolve the question this way, so let's make it official. NLeeuw (talk) 11:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kentuchy

[edit]

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 22:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

凧

[edit]

mentioned, but not directly. the article mentions 祝い凧 (iwai tako, or celebration kite) as a funny thing japan does to celebrate stuff, but not 凧 (tako, or kite). opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:RFOR, this subject does have some affinity for Japanese given the history of kites. Furthermore, the kanji does appear in the article-- no, not solo, but 祝い just means celebration, and is a very simple grammatical adjective; it does not make the combination 祝い凧 a unique and different word. Fieari (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oh right yeah while we're at it, should i create 祝い凧 after this is done? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lu Tianna

[edit]

It's unclear why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete This site and other, seemingly less reliable, sources indicate that "Lu Tianna" is a Chinese-language name adopted by or used to refer to Gillibrand. There is precedent to keep these sorts of names, as seen in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Foreign language redirects to Kamala Harris. But, unlike Harris's Chinese names, I don't find evidence of widespread use. I am willing to reconsider if evidence that this is indeed commonly used by Chinese speakers to refer to Gillibrand exists. Note that Lu Tian Na, which is used here by the New York Times, exists as well. I am not a Chinese speaker so cannot say if the number of words makes a difference. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment if this is treated like a Chinese name, then the variant spellings available from "Lu Tianna" would be "Lu Tian-na", "Lu Tian-Na", "Lu Tian Na" -- and the flipped forms "Tianna Lu", "Tian-na Lu", "Tian Na Lu" -- NYT uses one of the styles you can do with the syllables. In the PRC, the preferred form would have a single "word" to represent a name, so "Lu Tianna" if Lu is the surname and Tianna is the given name. This isn't the preferred style used in Hong Kong or Taiwan though. That is dependent and independent on romanization method, as some people style their names differently from the romanization method's preferred form. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Her Chinese name is known by the Chinese-language world, used by Chinese-language media. I can search a bunch of news article if I search on Google by her Chinese name "陸天娜" [4][5][6]. The name Lu Tianna (陆天娜; 陸天娜) is used by herself, pretty irrelevant to her English name. Lu Tianna, Lu Tian Na, Lu Tian-Na, Lu Tian-na are essentially the same, just with or without space or hyphen. It is just the difference of transliteration, all of them are used to some degree (and actually "Lu Tianna" is the most conventional transliteration). However, the transliteration is not a conventional way to refer to her, not in Chinese media or English media. This makes me doubt but I am still leaning that it is more useful than harmful. Sun8908 Talk 14:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not mentioned at target. If you have to do this level of OR to justify a redirect, then just don't. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FC Türkiye II

[edit]

This could refer to the B-team of the target club, but it isn't mentioned in that page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enteractive

[edit]

unmentioned, results gave me some unrelated brand that does Things™. incoming links seem to imply that it's a developer that worked under ljn maybe probably, but that's all the info i got cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Interactive (disambiguation) as a plausible misspelling (vowels that reduce to schwa can easily be mistaken for each other). Fieari (talk) 07:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't a schwa though; it's a stressed short i. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My local dialect/accent definitely reduces it to a schwa sometimes, nearly dropping it altogether. 'nteractive. 'nternet. I don't think this is uncommon. Fieari (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not totally off the wall as a misspelling, but still pretty unlikely given how common "inter-" is as a prefix. And in this case, having this would be harmful as it would inhibit searching for this actual term, which has quite a few hits in WP already as various company names (none of which are main enough for a redirect themselves). This seems to be what the original target was for, but I'm having trouble finding much about the exact relationship. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. And to add a little, god forbid I say the P-word, but yes WP:PANDORA applies, lest "enter-" redirects are deemed appropriate to make for all the (what I assume are) thousands of articles that begin with "inter-". This one is only even being intertained entertained because this redirect was up here for a different reason. Arguing for a retarget (and why to the dab page? Why not to the same place that "interactive" itself redirects?) is tantamount to saying: yes, we should delete this, but we should also make a brand new redirect, which no one seems to have bothered doing in the many years that the thousands of "inter-" articles have existed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was curious, and Special:Prefixindex/Inter just goes on and on, so I ran the numbers. "Thousands" is correct. There's currently 10360 mainspace pages with titles starting "Inter", and another 22605 mainspace redirects starting "Inter"; 10407 of those redirects target mainspace pages not starting with "Inter", so would need {{R from avoided double redirect}}s created too if we took this as a mandate.
      For my part, I don't strongly care whether it's kept or deleted, but do not retarget to the disambig unless something with that spelling is mentioned there. (And I doubt it would belong if it were.) Not a plausible misspelling. For context, original target was LJN Toys, which at the time was a separate article that did prominently mention this term. —Cryptic 19:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment: a little late to remember to mention and probably inconsequential at this point, but the only evidence i found of enteractive working under ljn was circular. that is, old diffs and incoming links cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 31

[edit]

No mention of September 31 in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone unify it with #April 31? Web-julio (talk) 07:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • September, which says that it has only 30 days in the first (very short) paragraph, makes more sense than either of the two new proposals, and I'd say to retarget there if there were any internal links. But there aren't, and a redlink is a better result here for all other use cases. Delete. —Cryptic 06:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, if September 31 ever gets talked about in Wikipedia, it would be in the current target (list). However, it's not yet. Though both mentions the words separatedly. Web-julio (talk) 01:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Pppery. There is no information on why did the editor must added in a leap year for September. IMO, there is only 30 days beneath the month of September but not added in one day. See this: [7] ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 03:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chalcolithic cultures of China

[edit]

No such list of Chalcolithic cultures exists at the target. This does not appear to be a subject that is discussed on Wikipedia at this time. Previously existed as a list with one entry.

This title may be able to be salvaged if the list of Neolithic cultures is expanded to include Chalcolithic cultures. However, searching for an article about a "Copper Age list" and being sent to an article about a "Stone Age list" does not seem generally helpful in a vacuum, and would be confusing to readers if there is no indication or hatnote about why they ended up here (that there may not have been enough content to substantiate an individual page for Chalcolithic). Utopes (talk / cont) 00:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karhusaari (island)

[edit]

Misleading redirect. There are several islands named Karhusaari in Finland, the island in Angelniemi is not the only one and probably the most notable either. The redirect had two incoming links, neither of which was actually about the island in Angelniemi: one was for an island in Espoo and the other for an island in Kuopio. I removed the wikilinks from both. This redirect should be deleted until we have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari. JIP | Talk 12:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I created this redirect when reviewing Karhusaari (disambiguation) because of the line in the article Angelniemi: "Other isles of Angelniemi are Angelansaari, Kokkilansaari, Pikkusaari and Karhusaari". If there are other islands then fine: mention them in the appropriate article and disambiguate at Karhusaari (disambiguation) to where this redirect should point. Otherwise, we actually do "have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC) (Not an expert in Finland but once had a lovely trip to Helsinki)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matsubara dialect

[edit]

No mention in target article. Google search pulls little results bar city existence and being a Japanese dialect. Blethering Scot 21:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If they're called dialects (方言), they're actually Ryukyuan dialects, and not part of Japanese (see Japanese dialects). As for the existence of the Matsubara dialect, there are some information about the pitch accent data from a quick search:
https://doi.org/10.15002/00012659
I wonder what else could be the criteria. Chuterix (talk) 21:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nueva Hampshire

[edit]

Seems to be a fail of WP:RLANG, but I am not too confident. Weak Delete? -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Half of the current U.S., including Dakotas, at some point were part of Spanish colonization of the Americas before Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. And given that USA doesn't have an official language and Spanish is the second most spoken, both redirects are justified. Web-julio (talk) 09:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both Neither meets WP:RLANG in my opinion. I'm unconviced by the mere fact that many people in the U.S. speak Spanish to justify keeping here. (Many people in the U.S. also speak French, for example, but neither Nouveau Hampshire nor Dakota du Nord exist). In regards to North Dakota's supposed affinity to Spanish, that's spurious at best. There was never a place known as "Dakota del Norte" under Spanish rule, which in this case would have been limited to the brief era of Spanish Louisiana. (Assuming you count claiming Indigenous land as "ruling" it). No sustained European settlement occurred in the region until well after the U.S. acquired the territory. Even then, Dakota Territory was one entity until 1889. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish Turkish

[edit]

nonsense redirect Golikom (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per this source, this source, and this source, "Turkish Turkish" is not a nonsense statement, but rather one used for categorical purposes.
We must also keep in mind that "English English", "French French", "German German", and "Spanish Spanish" all exist too. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can hardly call these sources. Beshogur (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I assume "Turkish Turkish" means the Anatolian dialects of Turkish so non Anatolian Turks aren't Turkish? What kind of statement is this? Beshogur (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a non sequitur. By that logic, French French would insult Quebec French speakers and other non-Metropolitan French speakers by calling them not French (which they aren't and neither is Turkish Turkish, that's why there is a second Turkish/French in the terms).
And to answer your previous question, whether I created them or not has no importance on whether or not Turkish Turkish should be kept/deleted. My sources are self-explanatory.
Here's two more sources I found with "Turkish Turkish" used in them. [8][9] 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 14:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stop giving example of other things. There is nothing like Turkish Turkish, and these are the "sources" you have hardly found. Beshogur (talk) 09:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you contend that the governments of Tokyo, NYC, London, Paris, Moscow, etc, are *not* reliable? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should read what reliable are. Beshogur (talk) 00:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is about the existence of a term, not about an event. I would assume sources needed would be more lenient than those needed for an event's occurrence? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 10:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such term. Beshogur (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As a redirect, it makes sense. And since it's in use, it doesn't really matter if it makes sense or not, either conceptually or grammatically (but if it was grammatically incorrect (aka redundant or pleonasm), so all other redirects mentioned above, such as German German, would be pleonastic/redundancies). Web-julio (talk) 02:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
or retarget per anon/Granger. Web-julio (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense what? So no one discovered this until late 2024? Beshogur (talk) 15:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Putting wedge

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Over two years later, let's try this again: delete per WP:RSURPRISE as unmentioned and per WP:REDLINK per my comments in the previous discussion's nomination statement. Steel1943 (talk) 17:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. "Putting wedge" is definitely a term associated with golf clubs but since we don't really know where to mention it or what it really refers to, we might as well put it in the bin until the term has an actual definition. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC) (blocked sock)[reply]
  • Refine to #chipper, as an unofficial, possibly erroneous, but commonly/colloquially used synonym. I can find published attestations for the term's use (in novels and such), but it isn't enough for inclusion in the article itself. But that's fine and plenty enough for a redirect, no inclusion is really needed. The redirect itself will inform someone searching for it: "A putting wedge is more correctly called a chipper." Fieari (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tata (Persian King)

[edit]

There were no Persians at the time of Tata Викидим (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The Persians haven't been created as separate ethnicity at that time. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This redirect was actually created by Maziargh in 2010 as a redirect to Awan dynasty, then subsequently made into an article by AnnGWik and since moved to the target of the current redirect (none of that is necessarily a reason to keep, though I will also notify those users of this discussion on their talk pages). There is no Tata on List of monarchs of Persia but I don't know enough about the plausibility of someone (incorrectly) believing this Tata to be Persian to say whether this should be deleted or not. A7V2 (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Tata is a semi-mythical figure, but the Awan dynasty dates to approximately 2000 B.C.. As far as I know (I am no expert), Persians came to Persis and became "Persians" a millennium later. If I am correct, Awan kings could not have ruled Persian people. Викидим (talk) 06:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was more getting at how likely would it be that someone would search for this person in this way, ie that people would think to search for a Persian king. But given the relative obscurity of this person, that question is probably impossible to answer so ultimately I don't think it makes much difference one way or the other if this is deleted. That said I think adding him to Tata (dab page) would be helpful and I will shortly do so, but perhaps you or someone else would like to revise my wording. A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as misleading per the abovementioned findings --Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that almost certainly the only way someone would find this redirect is by using it or following a link (which would likely be piped given the use of a disambiguator) so rather than being misleading, it can be helpful to help someone who is mistaken to find what they are looking for (but see my reply above as to whether that is likely to actually happen). A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The existence of a redirect is not a "factual offering". The argument for deletion is like saying redirects from typos should be deleted because they imply the typo is correct. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete, the target is simply not a Persian king. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I echo A7V2's thoughts. As a redirect to Awan dynasty, the redirect was getting views from 2010, which stopped in early 2022. The subsequent views were when the article was being written, and this RfD. Ideally we can argue to delete this since we have a factually titled article now. But Tata (king of Awan) doesn't have any redirects to it. What would be a proper redirect title to indicate a king who ruled some thousand years before his kingdom became part of the "Persian region"? What is a more colloquial name better than Persia to refer to the historial Iran region? Jay 💬 19:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The place is known as Elam or Susiana. Even (Sumerian king) disambiguation would be less factually incorrect. Викидим (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong Keep and tag appropriately as a redirect from a (very plausible) error. A redirect is not an endorsement of accuracy, it is a navigation aide to help those who are looking for something find that thing. If someone doesn't know that a thousand years before Persia that land was known as Awan, this redirect will help them. Fieari (talk) 05:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converse∫edits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harapanahalli railway station

[edit]

There is no mention of "harapanahalli" at the target article, or any other indication about a "Harapanahalli railway station" at the South Western Railway zone article. The only mention of "harapanahalli railway station" anywhere on Wikipedia is at the overarching article for Harapanahalli, but this article has a good number of problems and only contains two references, so it begs the question whether the railway station needs to be mentioned there either. In any case, it seems that there may need to be a change to either the target, or to the content, or to delete entirely if its not necessary to be included anywhere. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Add mention. Railway stations that verifiably exist (and this one does) are always plausible search terms and are always DUE for a mention on the article about the line and in articles about the settlement they serve. Note also this was a BLAR and should not be deleted without an AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello I'm the person who created this page the Harapanahalli Railway Station which is functioning currently six trains are operating through this station please help me to publish this article
Thank you :) Darshan Kavadi (talk) 15:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no mention at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linjian

[edit]

The name, which is that of a town in the Chinese province of Shandong, is being redirected to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China spokesperson with same name. Either it should be deleted or be redirected to the target page I have given.Toadboy123 (talk) 03:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 14:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per User:Sun8908. As far as I can tell, the primary topic is the town in Shandong, which we don't have an article for. I don't think this is a plausible enough search term for Linjiang, Linchen, Lin Jian, or Chen Linjian to be worth a disambiguation page. Best to let the search function do its job until an article about the town in Shandong is created. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

サイゴン

[edit]

Japan and Vietnam have quite an interesting relationship to say the least, but it's probably not enough to warrant a redirect to one of its cities. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 22:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mongola

[edit]

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 22:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of the United States (2008–2024)

[edit]

This redirect is the result of a bad page move but I don't think any CSD criteria applies to it. It is the result of an editor writing a new article that states that 2024 ushered a new era into American history. The article has now been moved to Draft space. Liz Read! Talk! 21:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who would be using this as a search term? Is it generally considered that American history ended in 2024? Liz Read! Talk! 23:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep No one is suggesting that American history ended in 2024, but 2008-2024 is covered in the target article. Ultimately, this is harmless. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - It is a small issue in that, as noted, it isn't causing any harm, however I agree that nobody is likely to type in that specific string of characters in our search - what will most likely happen in such a case is that somebody will start typing in "History of the United States (2..." and then autocomplete options will present. If you do this now, you'll see both the (2004-present) and the (2004-2024), which in my eyes is confusing, especially if I'm a regular reader who doesn't understand Wikipedia's policy on redirects. What's more, this does fall into crystal ball territory, and is a title that makes implications which readers might take as reinforcement that Wikipedia agrees with a particular viewpoint, something which I think would be more helpful to avoid. Any implications about the period demarcations of American history are best left to our sources. ASUKITE 01:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vendamonia

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Californian city redirects

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jamie Boo Birse

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Google Currents (2011–present)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kingite

[edit]

Ambiguous and not explained at target. (Soft) retarget to wikt:kingite? Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No opposition to a dab. The term Kingite is regularly used in discussing the original forces that supported the movement during the war but the term hasn't been used int he article. I don't think it needs to be explained as 'Kingite' is obvious when given with the context. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to create the DAB?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fay Spaniel

[edit]

This character has no confirmed last name, and this isn't even the right dog breed. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Google shows me that this name is in widespread use amongst fans, even amongst fans who say that they aren't sure whether she's a Cocker Spaniel or a Poodle. It's not just one corner of fandom, it crosses multiple different social media sites, fan sites, art sites, forums, and so on, and also it crosses over into the furry-sphere which is related but distinct from Star Fox fandom. It's certainly not an official name as far as I can tell, but the extreme widespread nature of this name being assigned to this character, rightly or wrongly, makes it a pretty plausible search. As a navigational aid, this will get a searcher to the right place where we have information on the character being referred to. Fieari (talk) 00:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history in case of support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lanyard class

[edit]

I have been unable to find sources that describe the Professional–managerial class as the "lanyard class", which could also refer to other class groups. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The phrases are used as synonyms in the Niskanen Center piece I linked in the edit summary:
Graeber suggests that the electoral collapse of social-democratic and worker’s parties in Europe is a result of a “revolt of the caring classes” against the “proceduralism” of the “professional-managerial class” for whom “rules and regulations, flow charts, quality reviews, audits and PowerPoints that form the main substance of their working life inevitably color their view of politics or even morality.” [...] Warren’s “I have a plan for that!” slogan appeals mainly to the PowerPoint masters of the lanyard class, not the people who have to navigate the byzantine maze of their oversight.
and also in the Telegraph:
...managerial class getting tax perks to feel good in their shiny new electric vehicles, while the manual classes... It’s the lanyard-wearing boss class who are enjoying the perks of subsidised electric vehicles...
PK-WIKI (talk) 21:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 04:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This seems to me like WP:SYN from essentially a single source (since the second source given above does not even use the term directly!), and not a term in common use. Many non-managerial workers wear lanyard badges. You might as well create a link for the "suited class", "PPE-wearing class", "tabard class" or "steel-toed boot class". — The Anome (talk) 11:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Laptop class" is also redirect to PMC due to similar usage.
"Lanyard class" has similar connotations and is in fairly frequent use, unlike the other phrases you mention: https://x.com/search?q=%22lanyard+class%22
Blog post that defines it and also mentions an (unlinked) mention in "academic literature". Used here in an interview on Jacobin. Somewhat difficult to find reliable sources using the exact term, but it's definitely in use and I added two other reliable source citations above. Lots of "lanyards", "lanyard wonks", "lanyard-wearing", etc. in articles. "Lanyard" is a signifier of a class.
Definition also listed on Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:lanyard
PK-WIKI (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great Depression in the Middle East

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Asmodel

[edit]

This was blanked by Quindraco. When I investigated, I saw why. "Asmodel" was removed from List of DC Comics characters: A, therefore breaking the redirect. It was if Asmodel, who is apparently a ten foot angel/devil, simply blinked out of existence. I would imagine this would be difficult for any ten feet being to do. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte 👸♥ 04:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anybody out there?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GGKEY

[edit]

no mention TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, all books have a GGKEY at BGC, not just ones without ISBNs, from what I gather. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

[edit]

The Holocaust in the Netherlands, where actual pogroms happened, is a better target than a WP:RECENT football hooligan clash. मल्ल (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete "Pogrom" is not an established or a widely used term, looking at the coverage of this incident WP:RNEUTRAL. Retarget to the suggested article is also fine. — hako9 (talk) 20:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect as suggested, but I suggest adding a {{for}} hatnote (not a {{redirect}} hatnote, for language reasons) to that target. It is supposedly being used in prominent sources (and probably social media but I'm not on Twitter) to refer to the recent ethnic hooliganism, but I agree that it's inappropriate and insensitive to refer to this as a pogrom when actual state-sanctioned pogroms actually happened here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep - Redirects are navigation aids. With the target article saying that the President of Israel characterized the attack as a pogrom, that's sufficient to make it a reasonable search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The purpose of the redirects is covered in WP:RPURPOSE. The President of Turkey characterized the president of Israel as a "genocidal murderer". Is that sufficient to make it a reasonable search term, and therefore, a redirect? M.Bitton (talk) 01:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your analogy doesn't apply. Per WP:BLP, it would be inappropriate to put into the biographical article on the President of Israel the personal attacks that some other world leader made (although it would be appropriate to say that he has been criticized). Likewise, we do not put into biographical articles all the insulting "nicknames" that Trump has given all his political opponents.
    In the case of this redirect in question, the target article specifically has the term "pogrom" in the article, and there are no WP:BLP concerns.
    It's somewhat bewildering that this is not obvious, and I need to explain it. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's somewhat bewildering that you missed the obvious point: the president of Israel is not a reliable source for such a statement. His irrelevant opinion can be attributed to him, but that's about it. M.Bitton (talk) 14:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:RS does not apply to redirects. The question about redirects is whether it's a plausible search term. The fact that the President of Israel called it a Pogrom, and it's in the article, makes it a plausible search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Preferably delete, the usage of pogrom seems to be isolated to biased sources and should be avoided for obvious WP:NPOV concerns. I think a retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands would only work if it is retarged to something specific on that page. Esolo5002 (talk) 08:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. What happened yesterday in Amsterdam was characterized by reliable sources as a pogrom. This is stated in the lede of the target. What happened in the Netherlands during the Holocaust was mass-murder of Jews, but not a pogrom or a sequence of pogroms. In fact, that article does not mention pogroms and never uses the word.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have any of the WP:RSP described this as a pogrom in their own voice? — hako9 (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands or delete.
When I was a fresh-faced disambiguator, I came across an ambiguous link to a place in modern Belarus. I identified it.
The very next problem was identical. I solved that too.
The third one was the same, and I solved it as well.
At that point, I took a break, because for some reason I was unable to focus properly and was swearing uncontrollably. One of those three places, obliterated in the early 1940s, is commemorated by an engraved stone in the ground. The other two are not.
Calling the recent incident in Amsterdam a "pogrom" is an insult to all those who were victims of actual pogroms. FWIW, I have no Jewish heritage. Narky Blert (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy and Strong Keep - What happened in Amsterdam was horrific and it needs to be reflected as such. It has been described as a pogram and that's because it was one. MaskedSinger (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm going to try to say this as charitably as possible, but as someone whose relatives have had to flee actual pogroms during WW2, I feel I do need to say it:
    I find this comparison, made by heads of state or politicians and now defended by you, incredibly insensitive, deeply upsetting, and bordering, itself, on antisemitism, given how profoundly, by association, it minimizes the horrors of anti-Jewish pogroms and relativizes the atrocities of those that carried out pogroms. Especially now that it's become increasingly apparent the Israeli fans engaged in behavior that could itself, at best, be described as monstrous bigotry and cheers for ethnic cleansing.
    Either way, while I wanted to share how offensive I think this comparison actually is, I'm aware my feelings on the subject matter little. The only question that should be considered here is: per RNEUTRAL, is this term one that's been established by reliable sources to have due weight and therefore meets the criteria for NPOV redirects? I don't have an answer to that myself as I haven't looked at the proportion of sources that use the term, but I think that's what should be focused on here. LaughingManiac (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @LaughingManiac How is calling it a pogrom bordering on antisemitism? MaskedSinger (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I said what I said and have laid out my reasons for saying it already. Take it or leave it at that. LaughingManiac (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A very quick Google search demonstrates that the term “Amsterdam pogrom” and “pogrom in Amsterdam” are being widely used to describe the article topic. This strikes me a reasonable search term; I personally used the redirect to initially find the article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC) EDIT: under wikipedia:RNEUTRAL we are permitted to use non-neutral redirect titles and are in fact given extra leeway because redirects are less visible to readers. Given that the the term has been frequently used in reliable sources and given that it is a reasonable search term for readers to utilize, I really do not see a justification to delete. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget or just delete - the reliable sources used in the article which I spot-checked do not describe this event as a pogrom; at most they quote Israeli officials doing so. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 02:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The sources are not describing this as a pogrom. Netanyahu is not a reliable source for what this article should be called. Parabolist (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete An unfortunate event with poor behavior all around does not meet the definition of a progrom. If someone has called it that that can be reflected in the article text but we shouldn't be saying it was one. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 02:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete or redirect as suggested. Not a pogrom, though there was violence against Jews. Natg 19 (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 04:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands. This feels like another case of WP:RECENTISM. 67.209.128.164 (talk) 08:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget WP:RECENTISM in full swing. Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands per Ymblanter. The segregation and deportation of Jews in the Netherlands was a gradual and meticulous process. The holocaust article also has no redirects or incoming links from articles having "pogrom' in the title. If a president naming a recent incident as a pogrom, is irrelevant opinion, a group of Wikipedia editors characterizing the Holocaust in the Netherlands as comprising of a pogrom, is not any less. But if we have other redirects titled "pogrom" targeting holocaust articles where "pogrom" is not mentioned, or pogroms didn't happen, then I would like to look at those, and possibly reconsider. Jay 💬 08:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ted, Ned and Ed

[edit]

These minor Codename: Kids Next Door characters (security guards of the Mustache Office Building who appeared in "Operation: S.H.A.V.E.") are not mentioned in the target article, and they weren't mentioned in the now deleted List of allies in Codename: Kids Next Door or List of Codename: Kids Next Door characters (whose extensive edit history is located at List of families in Codename: Kids Next Door) at the times the redirect was pointed at either page. Plus, a Google search for this exact term brings up mostly unrelated results (including one for the category where the redirect is located), and the redirect is also kind of ambiguous (it could refer to any three characters with these names), so I'm not sure if this is really worth keeping. Regards, SONIC678 01:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cite AV media

[edit]

One of the many mainspace redirects that link to citation templates created by the same user. He has created many of them and I'm not in the mood for bundling so I might as well nominate one and see how that plays out. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was discussed in 2012, time to revisit it and get it deleted -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE #Cite web was nominated later today -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete while many results are for wikis many aren't so its not a Wikipedia specific term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep The major CS1|2 templates should be frictionless reaching the documentation, anything we can to help editors figure out how to find and use these tempalates overrides any minor guideline technicality. Nobody has presented a practical reason why this redirect would be a hindrance, but there are strong arguments why it's useful to keep. Also I'm concerned by the sheer volume of RfDs by an infinity banned sock, which are then followed up by a single IP editor voting/arguing in support of the nom. -- GreenC 16:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode)

[edit]

No content about the topic in Wikipedia, just a directory of TV series episodes. fgnievinski (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raleway

[edit]

This redirect doesn't seem to make sense. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So hell

[edit]

Unneeded redirect. The term "So hell" is not mentioned in the target article. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So hell is a dependency hell about .so files, which .so is an executable format used on Linux. NagisaEf (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 00:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur J. May

[edit]

Also Arthur James May. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/Yesterday&oldid=1246127561"