Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 13[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 13, 2020.

Wikipedia:Reflist[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 retarget to Wikipedia:Citing sources#How to create the list of citations. (non-admin closure) Pandakekok9 (talk) 01:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wikipedia:Citing sources#How to create the list of citations, where WP:REFLIST currently points. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:18, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Retarget this cross-namespace redirect. It probably would have been easier to just fix the problem by reverting this erroneous edit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per the edit summary of the "erroneous edit": "match existing WP:REFLIST" – wbm1058 (talk) 23:04, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per above --Lenticel (talk) 01:50, 14 June 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.

Outline of art[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. It is WP:SNOWing. (non-admin closure) Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 10:04, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This should redirect to somewhere other than this page. Visual arts are not the only kind of art. There are other kinds such as performing arts and fine arts. Interstellarity (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the direct to the "Outline of visual arts", per the Art article. Its second and defining paragraph begins "The three classical branches of art are painting, sculpture and architecture. Music, theatre, film, dance, and other performing arts, as well as literature and other media such as interactive media, are included in a broader definition of the arts." Art, singular, commonly means the visual arts. The present redirect doesn't seem confusing but probably expected when searching for the term "Outline of art" without the 's'. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Randy. On WP, as in real life, plain "art" means "visual art" in the great majority of contexts. Where else would it go? Interstellarity, please accept this, and stop your guerilla campaign on this point. Johnbod (talk) 03:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. I cannot improve on those reasons. Narky Blert (talk) 06:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Randy Kryn, Johnbod, and Narky Blert: What is the difference between the Art article and Visual arts article? Should they be merged? Interstellarity (talk) 09:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That would need a WP:MERGE discussion, which is outside the scope of this forum. Narky Blert (talk) 10:09, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We've had this discussion before, & this is not the place to repeat it. The names are a bit confusing, and a (re-)rename of Art is probably the best thing to do. Johnbod (talk) 13:37, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnbod: I would be willing to take Art to an RM. I just have one question: what would be the best title for that particular article? I will open up a discussion on the talk page of that particular article so you can reply there. As you said before, this isn't the best place to discuss it. Interstellarity (talk) 15:29, 14 June 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.

Lesser Kleptomaniacal Moth[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's no mention of this name at the target page. A websearch for that name has no hits. I suspect this is vandalism.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  22:11, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per WP:G1 WP:G3 as a WP:HOAX. The qualifier "lesser" suggests a distinction from other related species. Googling "Kleptomaniacal Moth" yielded that rarity, a unique hit: this redirect (the quotation marks deny it status as a Googlewhack). The capitalisation is another giveaway: only proper adjectives are capitalised in species names; to the best of my knowledge, the final noun is never a proper noun and is therefore never capitalised.
The mention in Arna (moth) was soon reverted.
Consider adding to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia; this redirect was created in July 2010.
The existence of the Pacific Northwest tree octopus is at least attested in unreliable sources. (It was several years before Conservapedia noticed anything unusual.) Narky Blert (talk) 06:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete @Narky Blert: Do you mean WP:G3? G1 "patent nonsense" explicitly says hoaxes don't apply. Yes, it should be added to WP:HOAXLIST, but IMO shouldn't be speedily deleted since it doesn't seem like a blatant hoax, especially since kleptoparasitism is a real thing.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:43, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mr. Guye: Yep, G3 - gud spot. Are any kleptoparasites kleptomaniacs? Narky Blert (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Narky Blert: I don't think so. IDK I'm not a zoologist.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  19:33, 16 June 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.

Focus FM (Ghana)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Focus FM (Ghana)

General Disarray[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A problem. A WP:XY problem because the redirect points to the character Dougie (who plays the character), but could also point to the episode the character came from, Professor Chaos. Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 21:01, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is not WP:XY because there's no "and" or "or" in the title; the title is about a single topic, not two. Targeting the character seems more directly related than targeting the episode, in my opinion, since this is apparently a recurring thing (the target article describes them as "[h]is most prominent appearances"), so multiple episodes might reasonably be relevant. But the character is the character. --NYKevin 02:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 20:38, 13 June 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.

Cup Foods[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) 15:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's mentioned at the target, but it's such an incidental aspect of the killing of George Floyd that I doubt that this redirect would be of much help (and is also potentially a nasty WP:SURPRISE, particularly for as long as a picture of Floyd being killed stays as the infobox image). signed, Rosguill talk 20:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jax 0677: WP:CHEAP is an explanation on the general nature of redirects, it doesn't give any information why this redirect should be kept. Without that information, I'd recommend this !vote be given the weight it deserves—zero. -- Tavix (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - I just changed the redirect target, to where Cup Foods,"a grocery store at the intersection of East 38th Street and Chicago Avenue in the Powderhorn Park neighborhood of Minneapolis" is mentioned. If this is where the incident occurred, then there is no reason to remove the redirect. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Delete, or at the very least retarget to the section Killing of George Floyd#Arrest. I don't think many people who want to know more about Floyd's death are going to be searching for Cup Foods; it's more likely someone who wants to learn more about Cup Foods will search for that instead. It seems like Jax 0677 has retargeted already though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:12, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too tangential and unlikely to be useful; also seems like a violation of WP:WEIGHT. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as refined to Killing of George Floyd#Arrest, where one can find a description of the store. -- Tavix (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Killing of George Floyd#Arrest and death per Tavix, but I'm suggesting a slight different target so that the photograph of the store is visible. Incidentally, for the past three weeks I'd assumed the store was actually a Cub Foods and some out-of-state reporter mangled the name. I suspect I'm not the only person with that misconception, so this redirect seems useful in that it points to information (including a photograph) demonstrating that the newspapers actually got the name of the store right. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that the keep and keep-and-refine votes are missing my main concern here: who exactly is going to be looking up the phrase "Cup Foods" hoping to find more information about the location of George Floyd's death? I would bet that 99% of the people searching for that term are looking for more information about Cup Foods, not a police killing that happened to occur outside of a Cup Foods. signed, Rosguill talk 00:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Rosguill. --JBL (talk) 01:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. This should be recreated as an article about Cup Foods, or a redirect to the owner of the business. --Pandakekok9 (talk) 01:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Nothing in the target article tells me anything about Cup Foods, other than it's a grocery store in Minneapolis that sells cigarettes and has a rust-coloured awning. If I wanted to know that I'd look at their website, if I'm looking it up on Wikipedia I want encyclopaedic information about cup foods - things like history, whether its a chain, who the owner(s) is/are, etc, but I'm getting none of that from the article. Indeed reading that section of the article (or articles in other places about the same incident) is one of the most likely reasons I'd be looking for information about the business in the first place. Thryduulf (talk) 14:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or redirect to Cub Foods as {{R from misspelling}} I live relatively close to there, and it is not called "Cup" Foods, it is called Cub Foods. The current title is misspelled. And it isn't exclusive to this one store in that one area. They have grocery stores all over the Twin Cities. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: "Cup Foods" is a very common name. Per Mr. Guye, "Cub Foods" is the more appropriate name. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 07:51, 22 June 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.

Unnatural green[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:42, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. While "unnatural green" is a phrase that's in use, I don't see any indication that it refers consistently to a specific shade, or to this one in particular (which would implicitly be a natural shade of green, as limes are natural). Slimy green is similarly not mentioned at the target, nor is it clear that it unambiguously refers to this shade. Delete unless a justification or a better target can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 13 June 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.

Virus del papiloma humano generalidades[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:17, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

non-English alternative name that's below the radar per WP:ENGLISH and the article (i.e. not mentioned, no significance). Widefox; talk 20:09, 13 June 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.

Virus del papiloma[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:16, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

non-English alternative name that's below the radar per WP:ENGLISH and the article (i.e. not mentioned, no significance). Widefox; talk 20:09, 13 June 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.

Five-Day Revolution[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 21#Five-Day Revolution

Kersti[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 Swap Kersti and Kersti (name). signed, Rosguill talk 21:15, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one Kersti and can block people from accessing other articles. I think this would be more suitable for a disambiguation page. Captain Galaxy (talk) 16:55, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give some examples of what other articles people may be searching for?--69.157.254.64 (talk) 20:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are Kersti Kaljulaid, Börjars, Kersti (name), Bergroth, Juva etc. Captain Galaxy (talk) 20:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dab per nom. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Kersti (name) to the base title, since all the usages appear to be names (either of real people or fictional characters). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Kersti (name) as suggested. Creating a second DAB page would be silly, and frankly I don't see how the status quo makes any sense in the first place. It would almost make sense if Kersti (name) was the smallest set index article in the world, but it's not, it's just a regular DAB page. --NYKevin 04:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Round-robin swap Kersti and Kersti (name), keeping Kersti (name) as a redirect to the basename. Note that Kersti (name) is not a DAB page, it is a {{given name}} page and correctly categorised as such. Narky Blert (talk) 06:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're right, it is a SIA after all. I don't know why I missed that. Anyway, it would be silly to have both a DAB and a SIA with substantially the same contents, so I agree that we should move it to the bare title. But Kersti seems to lack useful history, so I'm not sure there's much point in round-robining it. Moving Kersti (name) to Kersti would already leave behind a redirect, which I doubt anyone is suggesting we suppress (it would be quite harmless, and the page has been at that title for multiple years, so external sites or users may have linked to or bookmarked it). --NYKevin 21:37, 15 June 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.

Kill the Buzz[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. There doesn't seem to be any question that the redirect is okay per se. If there are any concerns about having a bad article in the page history, those can be addressed at the AfD that's still underway. (non-admin closure) –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This topic has been CS:d sent to draft and rejected multiple times. Moreover this redirect was turned into an article and is now back to a redirect because of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kill the Buzz AFD. As such it looks like just an attempt to retain the page (after it had been deleted multiple times). Slatersteven (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The redirect is mentioned at the target page and has been cited. Not to mention WP:CHEAP. Captain Galaxy (talk) 16:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Captain Galaxy. Keep in mind the AfD is also still open for some reason. Jalen Folf (talk) 20:25, 13 June 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.

Mojang Snatch[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:14, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling of "Catacomb Snatch". IceWelder [✉] 11:18, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:09, 13 June 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.

Uber Catacomb Snatch[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:14, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. Seems like a non-notable third-party derivative of Mojang's "Catacomb Snatch" (which is open-source). IceWelder [✉] 11:19, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. This redirect is misleading as Mojang Studios didn't develop this fork. --im temtem • hOI!! • fsfdfg • alt account of pandakekok9 04:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:09, 13 June 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.

Graded-commutative[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 21#Graded-commutative

Woodcutting[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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:32, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is this more likely to refer to logging or woodcut? Paul_012 (talk) 01:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would say redirect to "Woodcut" as logging is used for timber harvesting for lumber and typically not for cutting timber for fuel use. But then "woodcutting" could simply mean "harvesting timber for fuel". Vsmith (talk) 02:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pandakekok9 (talk) 07:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dab per Tavix. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 16:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dab per definition. userdude 01:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Woodcutter, having two dab pages that are so closely related would only be a hindrance. signed, Rosguill talk 04:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Separate dab. The two dab pages will have substantial overlap, but that's not complete (there's no sense in which "woodcutting" refers to a lumberjack), and it will be difficult to come up with a wording that will cover both terms. Given the stable and small set of entries, I don't see a particular maintenance problem in having separate pages. – Uanfala (talk) 17:24, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I really don't want two separate disambiguation pages, but Uanfala makes a good point about "woodcutting" and lumberjack above. --BDD (talk) 20:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 14:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems that we will never have consensus at this state. I think there's a middle option that may satisfy both sides. How about we make woodcutting a dab page, merge the contents of woodcutter to the dab and turn it to a redirect to woodcutting? I created a draft on the woodcutting page so that you guys can visualize. im temtem • hOI!! • fsfdfg • alt account of pandakekok9 07:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds fine to me. The choice of Woodcutting or Woodcutter as title is arbitrary; the latter is a few years older, but neither has extensive history. Since this seems unlikely to get big enough to require a re-split, I think a single page separated by usage like this is the best way forward. --BDD (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2020 (UTC
I still prefer separate pages, but your draft combining them is an acceptable solution. – Uanfala (talk) 10:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. signed, Rosguill talk 03:08, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK by me. "Woodcutting" is indeed the more general noun than "woodcutter", as it covers both the activity and the person doing it. On a technical note - that draft is overlinked per WP:DABBLUE. Narky Blert (talk) 04:26, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me as well. ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 13:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support current dab version. Wildly unlikely to refer to anything to do with woodcuts. Johnbod (talk) 13:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate via TemTem's draft. Good work! --BDD (talk) 14:45, 26 June 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.

Videogame-action-stub[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. These are all R3s ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:20, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect to Template:Videogame-action-stub DannyS712 (talk) 02:35, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Combined by Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. These cross-namespace redirects are unnecessary and not helpful. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Unused, and not needed. XNR's aren't a great idea in most cases, and these aren't helpful. Hog Farm (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Editors are expected to be competent enough to know that stub templates are located in the template namespace. Additionally, there was no need for this to be relisted, given the lack of any opinions to keep. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:57, 14 June 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.

Minister for Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 22#Minister for Community, Rural & Gaeltacht Affairs

Carl O. Manneh[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:09, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Manneh is only identified by one given name. A middle name is unsourced and not mentioned in the target article, making the redirect misleading. A redirect without the middle name already exists. IceWelder [✉] 11:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:05, 13 June 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.

Mojangsta[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:09, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seemingly an inside joke from 2012. Not mentioned anywhere in the target article. IceWelder [✉] 11:11, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral - I originally wanted to !vote "Delete as WP:MADEUP," but surprisingly they have used it on their official Twitter account: [1], [2]. I doubt that's enough of a WP:RS to include in the article, but it does appear to be official-ish. Or at least, it was in 2016. --NYKevin 03:06, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I did find the first (2012) tweet, leading to my assessment in the nom, while the 2016 was unknown to me. However, I still feel like passing mentions in two tweets are insufficient to warrant a redirect, especially since the term is left undiscussed (the tweets do not discuss the terms either!) in the target article. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 12:34, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Galaxy (talk) 13:05, 13 June 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.

Write in C[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redirect. From the page history, this redirect was originally an article about a "parody" of the Beatles song "Let it Be". It was later redirected to the Beatles song, but seems to have lost its target after several moves. Regardless, "Write in C" is not mentioned at the dab page, nor at the Beatles song page, and is not a plausible search term. Natg 19 (talk) 08:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete While I would normally say to revert to the article and discuss it at AfD, the only article version in this case was almost entirely a (probable) copyright violation and, according to the discussion at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 October 8#Dangling redirect the content was (a) attributed incorrectly and (b) extensively discussed after merging so there is no need for a new discussion. Pinging those who commented in that help desk thread @Card Zero, Fuhghettaboutit, PrimeHunter, and DMacks:. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This specific parody does not seem notable, and the the most proper target, Let It Be (Beatles song) (original of which it is a parody) does not mention it. Unless we have a non-primary source about this specific parody, I don't see where it would be includable. However, because there was previously an article that had some non-nonsense non-copyvio versions, I don't think a simple deletion of the whole thing that later became a redirect, solely based on RfD is proper. So delete but treat as PROD ("non-notable" flag that nobody objects to) that allow editor-request revival to improve the original content somewhere). That's a shade weaker than explicitly voiced consensus to nuke the content (apparently there was editorial local-consensus to remove). RfD isn't the place to discuss article-content deletions. DMacks (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The redirect title leads me to believe that the target is either about how to use the the computer programming language or how to compose music in the key signature. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:57, 16 June 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.

Catholic Studies[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 Catholic theology. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy (talk) 08:28, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's reasonable for this redirect to target the article about a Catholic studies institution. I suggest retarget to Catholic theology consistent with Catholic studies. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:40, 13 June 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.

Dwarf (star)[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 retarget to Dwarf star. It is WP:SNOWing. (non-admin closure) Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 05:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to the extant article Dwarf star, given that the redirect has almost the exact same name as this article, and it is more relevant than simply directing to the Main sequence article. BlackholeWA (talk) 05:45, 13 June 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.

Battered-woman's syndrome.[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 moved page to Battered-woman's syndrome without leaving a redirect by User:RexxS. Lenticel (talk) 01:54, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of a period/full stop in the redirect is unnecessary and an unlikely search term. Recommend deletion. Senator2029 “Talk” 05:20, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Obviously a mistake in the naming included a full stop. I've renamed it to Battered-woman's syndrome as somebody thought it a plausible redirect. That's a reason for an uncontroversial move, not a deletion discussion. --RexxS (talk) 12:34, 13 June 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.

Flashlite[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 20#Flashlite

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_June_13&oldid=971241028"