Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 27, 2020.

Silk (Corn Stalk Part)[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 17:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is incorrect. The silk of corn is not part of the stalk itself, it is rather part of the ear of corn itself. There is no part of the corn stalk specifically that is known as silk. Page creator evidently was not in FFA as a youth. Hog Farm Bacon 01:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Botanically-wrong and malformed qualifier. Narky Blert (talk) 11:36, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep: despite being named and capitalized oddly, it points to the correct target. Per Wiktionary, "stalk" can refer to the tough central structure of the plant or to one entire mature plant, and per the second definition the silk is a part of a cornstalk. However this redirect does not get much use. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:50, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Corn silk per Ivanvector. I've tagged it with {{R from incorrect disambiguation}}. There are no redirects to that article with parenthetical qualifiers right now, so I can definitely see the benefit to accommodating users starting to type "Silk (corn". --BDD (talk) 15:59, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak retarget to Corn silk per BDD. I was thinking the same rationale for doing so, and was going to sit this one out in case something changed considering I'm "weak" on this option due to the "{{R from incorrect disambiguation}}" issue, but at this point, eh sure. Steel1943 (talk) 18:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is in no way a plausible search term. The above would lend credence to the creation of Silk (corn) or similar, but this is miles from that. -- Tavix (talk) 01:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible, miscapitalised, and unhelpfully targetted, but I've created Silk (corn) as a redirect to Corn silk, and also added Corn silk to Silk (disambiguation).PamD 05:16, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The miscapitalisation is fatal here. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:02, 3 September 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.

Am fm radio[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 Tuner (radio)#AM/FM. signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect seems to have a WP:XY issue, considering that FM radio redirects to FM broadcasting, and AM radio redirects to AM broadcasting. Steel1943 (talk) 06:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Tuner (radio)#AM/FM. This one's a little trickier since the capitalization and nomenclature is atrocious! I also wouldn't be totally opposed to deletion. This shouldn't have XY problems because all three together (AM, FM, and radio—usually as an "AM/FM radio") is typically referring to hardware devices that are capable of receiving in either frequency modulation or amplitude modulation. That's probably why it was targetting Radio, but that article itself isn't about hardware alone, but the whole technology of radio. This should really be at AM/FM radio, but is it worth a move? Meh... -2pou (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, noting the possibility of creation of AM/FM radio. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • In this case, I would retarget and then move without leaving a redirect to preserve what little creation history there is. -2pou (talk) 17:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would strongly object to that per WP:MOVEREDIRECT. Colorbow clearly wanted a redirect from "Am fm radio", not "AM/FM radio", so let's not mess up the edit history for no benefit. If anybody wants a redirect at AM/FM radio, they are free to create it. -- Tavix (talk) 01:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tuner (radio)#AM/FM per 2pou. This would not be acceptable as an article title but as a redirect there is absolutely nothing wrong with it as there is a single unambiguously correct target. Not everybody searches using proper capitalisation and punctuation (or is easily able to). AM/FM radio should be created as a redirect to the same target. Thryduulf (talk) 00:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as suggested; it's lowercased and missing the slash, but otherwise is fairly standard terminology. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tuner (radio)#AM/FM per 2pou. Although AM/FM radio doesn't exist yet, that's still a plausible misrendering of the term. Regards, SONIC678 19:21, 29 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.

Die.net[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 5#Die.net

Shahjalal[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 5#Shahjalal

Full Stop[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was move the target to Full Stop. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a primary topic named Full stop. However, I have no clue why "Full Stop" redirects to its disambiguation page. Seventyfiveyears at 21:11, 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.

Vegetable pests[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 4#Vegetable pests

"The Atlantic hurricane season" redirects[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. I honestly think these are perfectly plausible and harmless, but there's a consensus to delete and they don't appear to have seen much use at all, so it would be pointlessly costly to belabor the point. signed, Rosguill talk 20:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why those pages redirect to its own hurricane season. We don't have the redirect The Atlantic hurricane season, (i.e. The 2019 Atlantic hurricane season, The 2004 Atlantic hurricane season, The 1992 Atlantic hurricane season, etc) these are the only mentions of "The Atlantic hurricane season" in the English Wikipedia. Seventyfiveyears at 20:07, 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.

Draft:Nina Kapur[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 5#Draft:Nina Kapur

2020 Singapore Grand Prix[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 3#2020 Singapore Grand Prix

Running gags in the Pokémon anime[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 17:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No such list in target article. However, Running gags in the Pokémon anime is a {{R with history}} that was seemingly WP:BLANKANDREDIRECTed back in 2006. Steel1943 (talk) 18:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore article, redirect the other title to it and then send to AfD. I don't think it will survive as an article, but it's not speedily deletable so needs to be discussed at the correct venue. Thryduulf (talk) 18:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is not an encyclopedic topic. There's no need to go through another layer of bureaucracy when it's clear the article would not survive an AfD. It was redirected back in 2006, so it has long been stable as a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 01:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there’s no chance this will survive an AFD meaning we shouldn’t have to restore the article simply for the process.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 04:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Makes no sense to restore a 14-year-old version in order to take it to AfD. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:31, 31 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.

Cultural references in Pokémon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 3#Cultural references in Pokémon

EnWrong[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete per WP:G7. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 21:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, leaving the connection between the target and the redirect unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 18:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Can't remember what I was on about when I made this one, beyond a few news articles its a term that is rarely used: [1] [2]. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 18:37, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I vote to eliminate the redirect. It's a sarcastic term unlikely to be used by someone looking for the Enron scandal. Wiki name (talk) 21:30, 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.

Kong Hong[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. Plausible but ambiguous misspellings are typically deleted. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is very implausible and misleading. Seventyfiveyears at 15:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The redirect and its target actually look identical at first glance, I had to look twice to see the difference, so therefore not misleading. It also has received a decent amount of pageviews for the past five years or so. CycloneYoris talk! 20:15, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY as a misnomer or typo for multiple things (e.g. Kong Hon) but not the correct name of anything in Wikipedia. The pageview statistics only tell us that something pointed to this in error (maybe an external link, given that there's a 100-hit spike on one day and just one person on most others); they don't tell us that the readers who followed the link actually ended up where they wanted to. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:26, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...except the search does not give Kong Hon as a result.[3] This is a plausible misspelling. Keep. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That proves nothing besides that when you don't put quotes around your search terms, Wikipedia's search engine returns page matching your search terms in either order instead of trying to guess if you misspelled something. Dropping one letter from an unfamiliar name is obviously a plausible error. In the absence of any real evidence about whether that's more or less likely than swapping two distant letters in a name that people are much more likely to have heard before, the XY problem remains. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Completely implausible redirect. Aasim 18:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I can see this as a plausible misremembering of which word comes first, especially given they both sound similar. The fact that Eastern name order is "backwards" for a westerner may also lean into some of the plausibility for most English speakers. -- Tavix (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY as stated above. Let the search function do the job. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 09:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: it can with equal ease be a misspelling for several terms. If there are concerns about the search engine not producing helpful results, then a dab page can be created. – Uanfala (talk) 22:35, 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.

Disk Hacker[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 Hacker International. signed, Rosguill talk 17:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 08:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Disk Hacker has no relationship to the Floppy disk article other than maybe as a game it is distributed on a floppy disk. To add it to the FD article would be undue. Tom94022 (talk) 16:10, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A Google search suggests that this is an old blackhat thing used to pirate disks. Hog Farm Bacon 18:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget The term (the name of a software product) is used and explained in the "Hacker International" article, hence let's redirect there (or to Famicom Disk System). --Matthiaspaul (talk) 09:33, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Hacker International per Matthiaspaul. While the use was for Famicom Disk System, this is not actually mentioned at that article, so it would have the same problem. -2pou (talk) 15:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 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.

Ham steak[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 Steak#Pork steak. Closing this discussion since they both seem clear and specific. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 20:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY. Pictured twice with captions, but not specifically identified in the target article's context. The redirect could equally refer to the subject at Ham. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep and refine to Steak#Pork steak, which provides access to the pictures. My understanding is that the leg cuts referred to in that section would indeed be ham steaks. This is a bit confusion since all ham is pork but not all pork is ham. So ham steak is not pork steak, but it is a steak made of pork. A standalone article could better explain this, but I don't really see the case for WP:REDLINK deletion here. Alternatively, explanatory text could be added at the section. --BDD (talk) 15:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BDD. In addition, to decouple the incoming links from the sub-topic organization in the article, we could refine the link to point to Steak#Ham steak and add an {{anchor|Ham steak}} at the "Pork steak" section header to semantically distinguish between the two types. This way, the anchor could be moved to a new section without having to update the redirect whenever the article gets further developed and someone writes something specifically about "Ham steak" in the future. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 08:39, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a step in the right direction. --BDD (talk) 15:15, 31 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.

Catcher(baseball)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 17:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB. Catcher (baseball), the version with a space, exists and targets the same page as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 16:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unnecessary clutter. Narky Blert (talk) 06:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, why should this exist when we already have the correctly formatted counterpart? Regards, SONIC678 19:17, 29 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.

Famous Bowl[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 5#Famous Bowl

Popiz[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 17:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Third party search engines return results for a claymation TV series associated with the subject at BabyTV. Steel1943 (talk) 16:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or retarget to BabyTV and I can't decide which one to do. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, since there's no mention of this at BabyTV. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 01:01, 1 September 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.

Displeasure[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 5#Displeasure

Mississippi Mudflap[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 3#Mississippi Mudflap

Assistant head[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 Deputy head teacher. signed, Rosguill talk 17:33, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect term neither mentioned nor explained in given target. Hildeoc (talk) 00:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Deputy head teacher per all. Seventyfiveyears at 19:38, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous per Shhhnotsoloud. MB 01:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Deputy head teacher. This is another example of a term that is theoretically ambiguous but when you actually do the research it's clear that in practice it actually isn't. A google search for the exact phrase reveals that literally 100% of the results on the first six pages are for assistant head teachers, as are all the results on the 8th page. On the 7th page one result was for an assistant head of PE at a school, all the other results on the page were for assistant head teachers. The usage to mean deputy head teacher is therefore so overwhelmingly primary that any action other than retargetting there would is unsupportable by any actual evidence. Thryduulf (talk) 10:02, 29 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.

Patty Henderson[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 17:33, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at List of Malcolm in the Middle characters. Also, the character appeared only once whereas the page is for recurring characters. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:52, 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.

LILAC[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy keep. Resolved by nominator, retargeted to Lilac (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was a redirect to Librarians' Information Literacy Annual Conference, which was taken to AfD and retargeted to Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals where it is not mentioned now and does not appear to have been mentioned even at or after the time of that AfD. PamD 08:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it isn't mentioned in the target article a dab page purist will delete the entry. PamD 18:35, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
...Making the encyclopaedia worse for readers. Thryduulf (talk) 19:03, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, possibly, but you know that is how dab pages work: if it isn't mentioned in target article it doesn't go on the dab page. PamD 19:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
LILAC now retargeted to dab page, which now includes entry for Librarians' Information Literacy Annual Conference. All done and dusted I think. PamD 19:27, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks PamD. Looks great! ~Kvng (talk) 00:36, 28 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.

QutubeAllahabad[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 17:32, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Relisting again after removing the unreferenced term from the target page. (as suggested by Rosguill) The reason for deletion stands same as the previous nomination.

The target page(Muhibullah Allahabadi) had no reference about the alternate name(that is the redirect -QutubeAllahabad), until it was added by the page creator of QutubeAllahabad here, without any suitable reference. I have removed the dubious mention from the target page and left a message on the talk page. The page creator lists here a website, but its a user-generated website which does not seems to be reliable and independent to be accepted as a ref. Zoodino (talk) 07:19, 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.

Wikipedia:/NBASICCRIT[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) 15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Stands for "Notability BASIC CRITeria" The problem is, literally tens (hundreds?) of WikiProjects have "Notability BASIC CRITeria", and so it makes no sense for this redirect to point to a particular WikiProject subpage, as opposed to another WikiProject's subpage. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:29, 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.

Joint science department[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) 15:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the Claremont Colleges aren't the only institution in the world with a joint science department. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:34, 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.

1972 Singapore Grand Prix[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 Converted to an article so no longer in scope for RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 11:48, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RfD#D10. This race only appears in the results table (one of the three places which link to this redirect which is also unhelpful as it is circular). Delete to encourage article creation. A7V2 (talk) 01:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, however I have now populated the page with race information. I have left the Redirect and the existing text intact as per the request on the page in question. GTHO (talk) 10:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep (the article; remove the #REDIRECT statement). Article is now populated with content. DH85868993 (talk) 10:40, 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 King of Burgers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 3#The King of Burgers

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_August_27&oldid=977434735"