Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 18

August 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 18, 2020.

Hositle Takeover[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 16:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hositle Takeover → Takeover#Hostile (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely misspelling of "hostile". Steel1943 (talk) 23:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, likely created in error. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete spelling error, which in any case should target Hostile Takeover, the disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all. A side-effect of spelling errors in redirects is birfurcation, as in this example. Narky Blert (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2020 (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.

Drug raid[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 16:04, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Drug raid → Drug-related crime (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I find it odd that Drug bust was recently deleted, but this redirect still exists. The two terms are rather synonymous, so if "drug bust" doesn't refer to the target of this nominated redirect, I don't see how the nominated redirect could either. Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable and a redirect of a similar name was found to require deleting.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 02:18, 24 August 2020 (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.

Fuklo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Fuklo

STFU newbie![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 16:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

STFU newbie! → Internet slang (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Did you know I found another non-mentioned redirect that targets to internet slang? That redirect is not even mentioned in the Internet slang article. So obviously, it may cause confusion. Seventyfiveyears at 20:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY. No special connection between the two halves of the expression even without the exclamation mark. Narky Blert (talk) 21:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to newbie per myself. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:41, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am wondering what relevance "STFU Newbie!" has with Internet slangs. It's not commonly used as someone who's in Twitter actively. Although that made my day. Gerald WL ✉ 18:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete consistent with Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 11#STFU n00b!. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:13, 23 August 2020 (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.

Bidge[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 16:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Besides being a somewhat ambiguous misspelling, seems this redirect can also be a slang word for a common profanity word starting with the same letter. Probably best to delete. Steel1943 (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Could be a spelling mistake for almost anything, including the one-key-off bodge and budge. Narky Blert (talk) 21:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete although its existed since May 2006 and Google does show bridge(s) as well as the slang term it seem too implausible to be useful, WT links will show up in the search results if deleted which seem more logical. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it's the correct spelling of a nickname for Craig Biggio, which is mentioned in WP:RS [1]. Not sure if worth adding to his article. In Wikipedia search results it shows up at list of baseball nicknames. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Might that be ambiguous with his son, Cavan Biggio? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This redirect is ambiguous and may cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:10, 23 August 2020 (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.

Peage[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Peage

Lay's/Archive1[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lay's/Archive1 → Lay's (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect used to provide a blue link from Talk:Lay's/Archive 1 to its article, when that talk page had no space between Article and 1. It may no longer be useful. Brought here because it survived a speedy attempt in 2012. Pinging Nyttend. Certes (talk) 17:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per discussion here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:15, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ as harmless and occasionally helpful. What is to be gained by deleting this redirect? — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:14, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course, don't keep but retarget to the archive. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  @J947: Like Adnan Hajj below, this redirect is in article space but the archive is in Talk: space. Redirects from mainspace to Talk: space are unusual and at risk of speedy deletion per WP:R2. Certes (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  I realise that, but I don't see why the redirect is harmful. From RHARMFUL: ... Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 01:37, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  Your prejudice about what is harmful and what is harmless don't always work on WP. This redirect is indeed harmful with the reason being WP:RDEL#D10: [...] the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  That's a plainly ridiculous statement, in four ways. Firstly, you took D10 miles out of context. In full, it is If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject. This redirect cannot plausibly be made into an article, so therefore D10 doesn't apply in any shape or form given the If in the statement. Secondly, all the D reasons are stated in the guideline to be less important than the K reasons. This is indicated by You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list) [ensue D reasons] and However, avoid deleting such redirects if [ensue K reasons]. Therefore, K5 takes precedent over D6 (or whatever D reason) – and all of them are overruled by RHARMFUL (Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones). Thirdly, I don't have a prejudice here. I formed my opinion on the harm of redirects after over 3 years on this site. There may be some times where it doesn't work, but this is not one of them. My opinion here is based on policy and first and foremost helping the readers. If a redirect is a net positive, then it should be kept. If a redirect is a net negative, it should be deleted. I don't think this redirect can be argued to be a net negative. Fourthly, I'm not !voting to keep this redirect, like you're suggesting. I'm !voting to retarget it to Talk:Lay's/Archive 1 – thus there is no target article like your previous comment says. Before you make comments, check your facts. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 19:16, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  
  For the record, struck and bolded for clarity. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 19:16, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Talk:Lay's/Archive 1 as the best target, then delete the redirect per WP:R2 ... or just delete per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 22:41, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- It could just be speedily deleted straight away if not for the previous speedy attempt, per this passage: [R2 also applies] to broken redirects that would qualify for this criterion if they were fixed. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:01, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Useless clutter. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Sawol (talk) 11:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm perfectly fine with such redirects being G6'd or R2'd. Deeply misleading in mainspace. Any editor going through talk page archives presumably has the competence to find the corresponding article. --BDD (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2020 (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.

Christopher Wood/Archive[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 it's complicated and will carry those steps out. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Wood/Archive → Christopher Wood (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not a G6 because the redirect has history, but it appears to be a version of the deleted Christopher Wood (Scottish painter). Certes (talk) 17:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per discussion here since there's no reason to keep the history that otherwise we could have relocated to some qualified title without leaving a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for various attribution reasons among disambiguation pages (this has some). — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subject of the target article is a human being, not an archive. Steel1943 (talk) 01:52, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: A WP:CUTPASTE move happened in this edit. Steel1943 (talk) 01:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Complicated vote incoming: Move the edits prior to this edit to Christopher Wood (Scottish painter), then redelete Christopher Wood (Scottish painter). Afterwards, merge the rest of the edit history to Christopher Wood (disambiguation) without leaving a redirect. (And then tag the redirect with {{R from merge}} since it is one per this edit, and the proof of this being the correct page is in the "before" and "after" summaries of this edit.) The end result should be all edit history going where it belongs, and the nominated title going red (deleted). Steel1943 (talk) 02:12, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I support this proposal, with the provision that Christopher Wood (artist) gets retargeted to Christopher Wood (painter). — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 03:50, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's just do that now since Christopher Wood (artist) is not a nominated redirect in this discussion, and it makes sense. Steel1943 (talk) 04:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - As nom, I also support the history merge proposal if Christopher Wood (Scottish painter) (which I can't see) was copy-pasted from an old version of the page now known as Christopher Wood/Archive. Certes (talk) 11:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Certes: It was! See this diff. Add that diff to the other diffs I linked, and there's evidence the old edits in the nominated redirect belong with the deleted edit history at Christopher Wood (Scottish painter). Steel1943 (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support complicated proposal. Narky Blert (talk) 11:00, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Sawol (talk) 11:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support history merge. As nominator, I suppose I should convert my comment above into a formal !vote. Certes (talk) 11:36, 25 August 2020 (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.

Sandiest[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 16:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Adjective that should either be deleted or retargeted to Wiktionary. That, and Sandier doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 17:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Search is better. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:02, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and let the search tool do its job. There's a probably WP:NN band called Sandiest. Narky Blert (talk) 13:36, 25 August 2020 (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.

Adnan Hajj photographs controversy/Archive1[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. Especially when taken with the Lay's discussion above, I think there's a strong enough consensus to G6 the other redirects Certes listed. I'll take care of them now. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adnan Hajj photographs controversy/Archive1 → Adnan Hajj photographs controversy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Borderline G6; brought here to establish a precedent either way. Certes (talk) 17:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by proposer: This redirect used to provide a blue link from Talk:Adnan Hajj photographs controversy/Archive 1 to its article, when that talk page had no space between Article and 1. It's clearly not a plausible search term and now serves no purpose. If deleted then I would add G6 tags to these similar cases: Battle of Vukovar/Archive1, Cyber-terrorism/Archive1, Dubstep/Archive4, European Union/Archive05, Jessica Lynch/Archive1, Kurt Angle/Archive1, Lego/Archive One, Recognition of same-sex unions in Australia/Archive 1 and Robert F. Kennedy assassination/Archive1. Certes (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per discussion here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Talk:Adnan Hajj photographs controversy/Archive 1 – what is to be gained by deleting this redirect? — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:05, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- ...And then it gets zapped per WP:R2... Steel1943 (talk) 01:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was tempted to retarget to Talk: pages, at which point policy deletes the redirects per R2, but that felt like gaming the system. Certes (talk) 11:47, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm perfectly fine with such redirects being G6'd or R2'd. Deeply misleading in mainspace. Any editor going through talk page archives presumably has the competence to find the corresponding article. --BDD (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2020 (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.

We've Got Hostiles[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 19:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We've Got Hostiles → Half-Life (video game)#Plot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:30, 18 August 2020 (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.

Matrix (name) (disambiguation)[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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Matrix (name) (disambiguation) → Matrix (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Badly-formed redirect no longer required as Matrix (name) redirects to disambiguation page Matrix. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These sorts of constructions are now disfavored, and no longer useful. BD2412 T 16:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While this may be old, it's no-longer standard construction, and seems rather useless. Hog Farm _Bacon 17:59, 18 August 2020 (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.

Matrixing[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 17:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete. "Matrixing" is ambiguous and without a mention in the article this redirect is confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete - agreed, since it's not even mentioned in Paredolia. This redirect was created in 2013 (!!!!) and has been sitting there, apparently ignored, ever since. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I created this redirect but I've no recollection why. Maybe I came across something like this. I'm not bothered whether this remains of not.--A bit iffy (talk) 19:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - a neologism coined on Ghost Hunters referring to exactly this phenomenon. This helps readers find what they're looking for and there are no better targets. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:X or Y problems. Matrixing is used in business as well as a part of Matrix management, e.g. "I'll be matrixing out half the team to this project." -2pou (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. I think it would be better to give readers something for this, for example a hatnote at pareidolia: "Matrixing redirects here. For the business management topic, see matrix management." Or just as good at matrix management: "Matrixing redirects here. For the phenomenon of perceiving stimuli as real objects, see pareidolia." Then readers looking for the term get something out of their search either way. I prefer the first because it's less awkward to describe. Search results would not be very helpful for this, since the exact term doesn't actually appear in either of the articles. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Devokewater (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2020 (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.

Cocaine binges[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 17:42, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cocaine binges → Crack cocaine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Considering that you can also have a cocaine binge on cocaine, which is a separate article, I'm not convinced it should target either one specifically. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Also, Cocaine binge doesn't exist, and never has. Steel1943 (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Devokewater (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2020 (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.

Booger sugar[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 17:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Booger sugar → Cocaine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not a common name for the subject, also appears to be a NN song. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I see many results at Twitter search "Booger sugar" at https://archive.is/HvseP (a bazillion), https://thebarchive.com/_/search/text/%22booger%20sugar%22 (92), http://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/text/%22Booger%20sugar%22/ (222). There is also https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/booger_sugar. --User123o987name (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Vague/ambiguous slang term. Steel1943 (talk) 14:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Urban Dictionary stuff. As well as the NN song by Pop Cult (no article), I found "Booger Sugar - This beer has no activity" from Mikerphone Brewing. Narky Blert (talk) 15:34, 19 August 2020 (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.

Nose Candy[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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nose Candy → Cocaine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nose candy → Cocaine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Given that I'm only really finding this term used in user-generated sites, this doesn't seem to be a common alternate name for the subject. Hog Farm _Bacon 16:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. You can see a bajillion results at Twitter search "nose candy" at https://archive.vn/qj8fy, http://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/text/%22nose%20candy%22/ (492), and https://thebarchive.com/_/search/text/%22nose%20candy%22 (111). I've heard the term "nose candy" used in multiple TV shows. There's also https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nose_candy. --User123o987name (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This source is from Nemours Foundation, this from the Alcohol and Drug Foundation, Australia (who look reputable; founded 60 years ago), and this is from the Government of New South Wales. Narky Blert (talk) 11:11, 19 August 2020 (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.

Battle of 1812[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#Battle of 1812

TLC Travel[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 Procedural close. Wrong venue for what is essentially a deletion review/request to restore a draft. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TLC Travel → West Yorkshire Metro (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The redirect in question was created by a merge, after which the merged section was completely eliminated, with only one mention of TLC Travel remaining, as part of a list of contractors.

On 11 November 2019, "TLC Travel" was merged to "West Yorkshire Metro" as a result of an AfD, citing notability issues.
- AfD discussion
- "TLC Travel" right before the merge
  - The sole citation was from Companies House.
- "West Yorkshire Metro" right after the merge (Section "Bus service" is dedicated to TLC Travel)
On 29 January 2020, the section on TLC Travel in "West Yorkshire Metro" was deleted.
On 15 May 2020, "TLC Travel" was restored as an article, with fewer content but with references provided. A few days later, this was reverted.
- "TLC Travel" as restored
  - Four references were provided, one from Buses (magazine) "Fleet in Focus" (this kind of article?), one that's apparently a paid article (I couldn't check if it really is a paid one though), one from the company's own website, and one news article about the company losing a tender.

Whether the new version satisfies the notability criterea I do not know (it doesn't according to at least two people), but I do think that the page, if retained as a redirect, would result in confusing those who use it, as no information about the company can now be obtained from the target article. Aside from restoring it as an article or deleting the redirect, leaving it be or merging it back into WMY with short descriptions of other contractors are the alternative options I can come up with. YTRK (talk) 13:52, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest a procedural close. The article has been reinstated and initiated a new AfD initiated so the merits of having the article reinstated, merged or deleted can be discussed there. Bretieni (talk) 04:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC) — Bretieni (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- That was the wrong venue. Concerns over a delete/merge decision made by an AfD should be made at WP:DRV, not there. A a s i m 05:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator and because the topic is not notable either. A a s i m 05:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to encourage article creation. Although mentioned in the current target, there is no substantive information. I considered a retarget to List of current bus operators of the United Kingdom but on balance a redlink and the use of Search gives better results to a user. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment

Two things to clarify

An improved version of the article exists.
I'm not fully supporting deletion; I'm merely proposing it as an alternative to the reinstatement of the new version. (Sorry I didn't state this clearly.)

Also I think whether the new version satisfies the notability requirements etc. is the first thing that should be examined, but is this the right place for this? (I've a feeling it isn't...) Was I supposed to go to deletion review or do an AfD? YTRK (talk) 14:27, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@YTRK:. I've looked at this again. The result of the AfD was merge but the merge was suboptimal because there's not enough in the target article to justify a redirect to it (hence my opinion to delete the redirect). If this RfD is closed as delete then that will clear the way for a new article on the subject (which might be via AfC, and might use content copied from the "improved" version of the article). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:57, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: I don't really get why it has to be deleted first, and how one can recreate the article based on the "improved" version once it's history has been hidden? Please could you explain a bit more? (On a sidenote, the merge was carried out with enough content in the Metro article, but was undone a few months later creating the present situation.) YTRK (talk) 10:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@YTRK: Yes, I see. I just thought that an AfC submission would give the validity of the article more weight, that is it would be subjected to scrutiny for notability etc. You could copy the old version to your Sandbox. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: Thank you very much for the suggestion and clarification. Moving it into draft namespace might be better to keep the history intact though. I'm for moving it into draft namespace and going through AfC. It will however be very difficult for me to further improve the article since I am not in the UK and information on the subject is scarce on the internet. YTRK (talk) 12:12, 23 August 2020 (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.

BRUSA Elektronik AG[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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

BRUSA Elektronik AG → Brusa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

A redirect to a DAB page with no relevant entry. German WP has no article. Delete, to encourage article creation if justified. Narky Blert (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom to encourage article creation. Though it could also be retargeted to Inductive charging#Transportation, where the company is briefly mentioned. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Enwiki has no substantive information on the subject, but Search gives a couple of results. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:08, 19 August 2020 (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.

Sockpuppets[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 Sockpuppet. Early close since the result seems both obvious and clear. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets → Sockpuppet (Internet) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect targets to the internet sockpuppet page. The previous discussion was to retarget as the result. The retarget result was to redirect with space to toy, without space to internet. This time, I wanted to have "Sockpuppets" redirect to its disambiguation page. Seventyfiveyears at 11:30, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill, Ivanvector, Thryduulf, Sonic678, King of Hearts, and Devokewater: This redirect is being now discussed. Seventyfiveyears at 11:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC) (re-signed, original did not generate pings Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:48, 19 August 2020 (UTC)}}[reply]

Speedy retarget to Sockpuppet per nom. I don't think the disambiguation page is helpful, but for now this should be a standard {{R from plural}} scenario. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:10, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy retarget as proposed. Likely the closer just missed this one since it's plural. I had a look and I don't see any other plurals neither with nor without spaces, so this should wrap it up. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- FWIW, the dab page was created after the end of the previous discussion. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 19:20, 19 August 2020 (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.

German-speaking Bohemia[edit]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

German-speaking Bohemia → Sudetenland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These terms are not equivalent. Various regions of Bohemia have been majority German-speaking over the course of its history, and the Sudetenland in particular is no longer majority-speaking today. There was also the Province of German Bohemia, although I think that has largely the same issues as Sudetenland in that it was a specific historical territory that is not transhistorically German-speaking. I would suggest either deletion or possibly redirection to Bohemia. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Rosguill has a point, on the other hand someone searching this is probably looking for the Sudetenland. (t · c) buidhe 13:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the usage history, it's not clear that anyone is searching this much at all. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:40, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, this may be a case of WP:R#DELETE #10: German Wikipedia has a sizable article on de:Deutschböhmen und Deutschmährer, which covers the history of German-speakers in Bohemia from the Middle Ages to the present day. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to encourage article creation. That German article looks comprehensive. Quoting from it, "Außerdem sind die Begriffe Deutschböhmen und Deutschmährer insofern genauer als die Bezeichnung „Sudetendeutsche“, weil viele Siedlungsgebiete weit abseits der Sudeten lagen" ("Also, the term 'German Bohemians and Moravians' is more precise than 'Sudeten Germans', because many settlement areas were far away from the Sudetenland"). Narky Blert (talk) 09:30, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
N.b., I found no relevant content at Geographical distribution of German speakers or List of territorial entities where German is an official language. --BDD (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're not going to find anything in those articles because of what happened in the aftermath of World War II. See Beneš decrees, Expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia, Flight and expulsion of Germans (1944–1950), etc. This is a historical concept, not a current one. The history section in the article on Bohemia contains some relevant information. Ejgreen77 (talk) 10:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To Rosguill's point above: "Deutschböhmen und Deutschmährer" translates to "German people from Bohemia and Moravia" and is linked to the enwiki article Sudeten Germans. It is not a classification for a geographical area. The geographical area inhabited by Germans in Bohemia/Moravia is already described at the article Sudetenland. (t · c) buidhe 11:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Narky Blert. --BDD (talk) 19:50, 27 August 2020 (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.

The Maltese Falcon (1936 film)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 25#The Maltese Falcon (1936 film)

Honda (congressman)[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, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Honda (congressman) → Mike Honda (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Confusing since I'm not finding any sources that refer to the target subject using their surname as a mononym. Steel1943 (talk) 02:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's not used. Related question... if I look up 2019 PVs for Honda (congressman) then I see 13 PVs in 2019. However, if I look at 2019 redirects to Mike Honda, I see 0 PVs from the redirect. So the PVs to a redirect are not counted when it functions as a redirect? And I guess only counted when the redirect page itself is viewed by an editor? - Wikmoz (talk) 04:42, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Wikmoz: the 2 links to pageviews analysis both point to the same thing: 2019 daily pageviews of Honda (congressman). What you can say is that of the thousands of monthly page views to Mike Honda, only a relatively very small number come through that redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: Sorry about that! I fixed the second link to show what I mean. It shows 0 redirects from that term. Trying to make sense of the disconnect. - Wikmoz (talk) 19:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I'm not aware of any precedent to have redirects such as this to "Surname (appointment)". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:23, 19 August 2020 (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.

Kim Do-young[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 17:39, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Do-young → YG Entertainment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No one by this name mentioned at the target, but there are two people with this name mentioned in other English Wikipedia articles. One is a singer in Treasure (band) (mentioned there only as "Doyoung"), who probably is not notable apart from the band; the other is the director of Kim Ji-young: Born 1982 (film), who won multiple "Best New Director" awards and so may be notable under WP:ANYBIO. The Korean Wikipedia dab page for the name also lists a baseball player, a voice actress, and a minor Busan politician.

Anyway, I'd suggest deleting this until one of those people gets an actual article. Disambiguation would be a distant second choice, but may at least prevent this from getting repeatedly recreated for only one target out of the multiple possibilities; it would also give us a WP:DABSEEALSO section to link possible mistakes, e.g. Kim So-young (a plausible one-key-off typo) and Doyoung (singer) (confusingly enough, his real name is Kim Dong-young not Kim Do-young). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:56, 18 August 2020 (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.

2019–2020 outbreak[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 26#2019–2020 outbreak