Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 5, 2020.

Magic Isles[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The result of the discussion was speedy retarget to Valinor#Magic Isles Withdrawn in favor of retargeting (non-admin closure) Hog Farm (talk) 16:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article, or anywhere else really (only mention on enwiki appears to be the name of a reference at David Copperfield (illusionist)). Delete. Hog Farm (talk) 23:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is the same as the Enchanted Isles [1], so retarget to Valinor is a possibility where it is mentioned (you can just say in the article "Magic or Enchanted Isles". Hzh (talk) 12:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Hzh, please retarget to Valinor#Magic Isles where it is now mentioned. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:16, 6 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.

PSinux[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) 18:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and a Google search brings up very little about this that could conceivably be related to satiric misspellings. Not used as an example, and no evidence of common use. Hog Farm (talk) 22:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete found no "satiric" usage. It was nominated in 2010 for deletion in a group of 36 other terms which were all redirected to satiric spelling. The result was no consensus, but in reading the discussion, there did seem to be some consensus for deleting those that are not mentioned at the target page. There also seemed to be agreement, among those who discussed it, that the mass nomination is a bad idea. Time to weed this one out. --Bejnar (talk) 18:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "PSinux" could, in theory, be a misspelling of "PsiLinux" a open-sourced project for delivering Linux on Psion netBooks. Not a likely search term. --Bejnar (talk) 19:55, 6 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.

Fransergio[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 Fransérgio (N.b., since this discussion began, the disambiguation page was moved to the base title). --BDD (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Create a new disambiguation article named Fransérgio (disambiguation) as this man is not the primary topic. There is another player whose article is titled Fransérgio (which may also have to be moved for the same reason). It is confusing that whether you type the name with the accent or not, you get a different person. Francisco Sérgio García is also nicknamed Fransérgio, according to his article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c5:e187:5f00:4d58:3971:670b:59c3 (talk) 20:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 13:49, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But. Fransérgio currently redirects to Fransérgio (disambiguation), and that is a WP:MALPLACED error; a bot will log it sometime soon.
Furthermore that target should not be classified as a {{dab}} page: it is a pure {{given name}} page (think chalk and cheese). Narky Blert (talk) 19:49, 6 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.

Elephant ear (doughnut)[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 Elephant ear#Other uses. --BDD (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Elephant ear" can refer to at least two dough-based dishes, a palmier and fried dough, but neither of them are called "doughnuts" AFAIK. Even if they are, this should redirect to the Elephant ear disambiguation page as an incomplete disambiguation. Smartyllama (talk) 18:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Elephant ear and add these two as entries there. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 20:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Elephant ear#Other uses, where both conceivable donut-related uses are listed. Hog Farm (talk) 22:30, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unnecessary differentiation OR Retarget to Elephant ear#Other uses per Hog Farm. Although these are supposed to be closed based upon the cogency of the arguments, things often stay open or get relisted, presumably on the basis that there hasn't been enough discussion. In this case, I do not think that any additional discussion will change the outcome, based on cogent arguments. --Bejnar (talk) 19:49, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget To Elephant ear#Other uses - my nomination was originally neutral as to whether to delete the redirect or retarget. At this point, given the arguments expressed above, I think retargeting would be the best option. Smartyllama (talk) 22:40, 7 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.

Murazor[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) 18:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently I missed some of these in the earlier discussions. Names of Nazgul in derivative works, so not really relevant to the main article. Per WP:VGSCOPE, too minor for the game articles. See #Dwar of Waw and #Hoarmurath. The number of these is ridiculous. Hog Farm (talk) 21:29, 27 May 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 18:11, 5 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.

Sankoh[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. --BDD (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The target has the rather clunky hatnote: "Sankoh" redirects here. For other people named Sankoh, see these search results. In the absence of a surname page, this redirect should be deleted to encourage article creation and allow uninterrupted Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Googling the term "Sankoh" indicates that Foday Sankoh is by far WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Sankoh", so redirect should still point to that article. I just now created a surname page Sankoh (surname), and changed the hatlink at Foday Sankoh to suggest the new surname page (instead of search results) for other uses. So this issue is solved, I think. —Lowellian (reply) 08:52, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's worse than that. Foday Sankoh is - for no good reason that I can see - being treated as WP:PTOPIC and Sankoh as WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. Sankoh (disambiguation) exists, and despite its title is a pure {{surname}} page.
Retarget Sankoh to Sankoh (disambiguation), then WP:ROBIN swap those two pages (per both WP:INTDAB and WP:PRECISE) and categorise the surname page correctly. Narky Blert (talk) 08:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, your comment was posted at nearly the same time I posted my comment above, so I think you missed my comment, so I'll recap it: Googling the term "Sankoh" indicates that Foday Sankoh is by far WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Sankoh", so redirect should still point to that article. Just minutes before you posted, I newly created "Sankoh (disambiguation)" in response to this RFD to solve the request for a surname page to fix a poor hatlink. But yes, as it turns out, all the entries on the list are currently surnames, so I've moved "Sankoh (disambiguation)" to "Sankoh (surname)". —Lowellian (reply) 09:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lowellian, are you saying that Sankoh is the common name mononym for Foday Sankoh, or is it more like Trump where Foday Sankoh is for now the most well known of the bunch? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The latter. "Sankoh" is not a mononym, but it usually refers to "Foday Sankoh", like "Merkel" usually refers to (and redirects to) Angela Merkel, "Bolsonaro" usually refers to (and redirects to) Jair Bolsonaro, "Sarkozy" usually refers to (and redirects to) Nicolas Sarkozy, etc. "Trump" doesn't redirect to Donald Trump because the word has the common other meaning of Trump (card games), but there is no other such common meaning for "Sankoh". —Lowellian (reply) 20:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Things like Google hits and pageviews give extremely unreliable measures of relative notability; see WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY. I've just put an article up for WP:AFD which had (count 'em!) 3,622 views in the last 30 days: an unreferenced article from 2016 about an utterly non-notable 1964 film. It is very rare that a surname has a WP:PTOPIC. Famous names like Milton, Shelley, Dvorak and Nimitz are DAB or name pages. Narky Blert (talk) 17:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Milton, Shelley, Dvorak, and Nimitz are DAB pages because there are multiple meanings of similar notability for each of those names. That is not the case with "Sankoh": Foday Sankoh is much more notable than all other individuals named Sankoh. Google "Sankoh", and you get page after page of results for Foday Sankoh rather than any other Sankoh. —Lowellian (reply) 03:13, 29 May 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 18:10, 5 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.

Feminist nationalism[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) 17:59, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Searching through Google Scholar results, "feminist nationalism" seems to generally refer to the intersection of feminist and nationalist movements (i.e. the mobilization of feminist sentiment for nationalist causes), rather than feminist separatism. I would suggest deletion, as we do not currently have an appropriate target for this term (and it is likely notable in its own right) signed, Rosguill talk 17:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – Let the editors create an article about the subject. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 18:00, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had thought about retargeting it to femonationalism, but it seems, according to the search results, that these two are different to each other. Feminist nationalism is more like left-wing (linking feminism with national sovereignty and self-determination), while femonationalism is more like right-wing (using feminism to justify racism and xenophobia). I'm tending to delete here. --im temtem • hOI!! • fsfdfg • alt account of pandakekok9 06:54, 9 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.

George Floyd (killed African-American)[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 Deleted. El_C 13:56, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term, useless, malformed and confusing. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 15:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It's ambiguous. Compare Derek Chauvin (killed African-American). Narky Blert (talk) 08:42, 6 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.

Sitcom movies[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. There's a reasonable argument that a useful article could be created here or at a related title - sitcom movies are certainly a thing that exists and is discussed in sources - but the general consensus here is that this target doesn't really cover the topic and that there isn't an obvious better option at this time. ~ mazca talk 21:42, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not equivalent, the target list includes films that are based on shows other than sitcoms, and doesn't include any non-British examples. I wasn't able to find a more relevant list elswhere, so I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 18:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - per nom, &c. The two are not equivalent and one searching for one is unlikely to be looking for the other. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk 19:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I created it because searching for that term didn't turn up anything relevant. There was a particular fondness for films based on British sitcom movies in the 1970s - possibly this article isn't the right redirect target, but there may be scope for a British films based on sitcoms article? Dennis Coventry (talk) 19:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 01:08, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom; British movies aren't the only ones based on sitcoms. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 01:44, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think this is a useful redirect — there was a run of British movies in the 1970s based on sitcoms and this is what I would have typed if I’d wanted to find a list of them. It could be adjusted to point just to the Comedy section of the list. P-K3 (talk) 02:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete We really don't say anything about the idea of sitcom movies. List of films based on television programs would be a more suitable target, since the idea is not exclusive to the UK. Redirecting to a subtopic risks obscuring other possibilities. --BDD (talk) 20:06, 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 14:08, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a very broad term with no obvious target, certainly not the current one. --Bejnar (talk) 19:55, 7 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.

TOCD[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. There's a good argument that TOCD, in the sense of "transgender OCD", does exist, and could potentially be covered - but as it isn't covered usefully at this target, and no participants have suggested a better one, this is not seen as a helpful redirect. ~ mazca talk 21:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, internet and scholar searches turn up a variety of results that don't clearly suggest that this is an appropriate target. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:10, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep one of a number of acronyms commonly used within the OCD community to refer to specific obsession themes common among people suffering from primarily obsessional OCD. TOCD refers to "transgender OCD", which is shorthand for OCD-fueled obsessions about one's gender identity (distinct from actual exploration of one's gender identity). TOCD is one of the four most widely used of these acronyms. The other three (HOCD for "homosexual OCD" or OCD-fueled obsessions about one's sexual orientation; ROCD for "relationship OCD" in which the sufferer obsesses over the irrational fear that they actually hate their partner deep down; and POCD for "pedophilia OCD" where people have a baseless, irrational, obsessive fear that they might be a pedophile) already have redirects to the articles or a relevant dab page. CJK09 (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete What CactusJack describes sounds interesting, but doesn't really have anything to do with the redirect discussion, which is not about whether or not transgender OCD exists. The salient point is that it's not described on Wikipedia (as far as I can tell), so the redirect will only mislead and disappoint readers looking for such content. (N.b., Since CactusJack is on a wikibreak through June 6, I suggest holding off on closing this discussion as a courtesy.) --BDD (talk) 21:17, 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 14:07, 5 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.

Woodcutting[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 13#Woodcutting

HOG SLAUGHTA BOYZ[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 Earl Sweatshirt#2014–15: I Don't Like Shit, I Don't Go Outside and Solace. signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created by a sockmaster; also Earl Sweatshirt is not called "HOG SLAUGHTA BOYZ" in any source. If it is a song Earl Sweatshirt made, then fine.  3125A Talk! Edits!  20:04, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 22:16, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Send to WP:DAFT (i.e. delete) and, if it really was created by a banned user after they were banned, consider G5'ing it. --NYKevin 21:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete and WP:DAFT. The user was banned for sockpuppetry, but it was the original account which was not blocked at the time so I don't think G5 applies. OcelotCreeper (talk) 16:11, 31 May 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 14:05, 5 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.

Hurricane Henriette (2001)[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 no consensus. signed, Rosguill talk 19:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect that was most likely created by mistake, since Henriette was only a tropical storm back in 2001 and it never attained hurricane strength. CycloneYoris talk! 09:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as wrong name. Note that the target of this redirect is broken: the information is at 2001 Pacific hurricane season#Tropical Storm Henriette. Narky Blert (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Since the difference between a hurricane and a tropical storm is one of degree, these two are likely to be mixed up by those who are not familiar with the classification system, or simply don't remember if this was a hurricane or a tropical storm. Debresser (talk) 12:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • And that is precisely why we should delete this, as to not confuse readers. Also this redirect was created recently in 2018, which further proves it was created in error. CycloneYoris talk! 22:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as wrong name, For those who are confused there is a perfectly good disambiguation page at Hurricane Henriette which lists the hurricanes and storms by date. If someone is confused that is a much better place to start. --Bejnar (talk) 03:29, 30 May 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 14:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, Narky Blert, and Bejnar. --im temtem • hOI!! • fsfdfg • alt account of pandakekok9 06:57, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Debresser. Extremely plausible misnomer, and we try to accommodate those (e.g., Prime Minister of the United States). Imagine you're fairly knowledgeable about hurricanes and tropical storms, and a friend asks you about "Hurricane Henriette, back in 2001". Which is a more appropriate response: "Oh, it was just a tropical storm. It didn't make landfall..." or "Huh?"? --BDD (talk) 17:57, 12 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.

Norbourn[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) 17:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional obscurity. Only mention on the English Wikipedia is as somebody's middle name. Nowhere really for this point that's within the scope of this triviality. Wikia-level. Hog Farm (talk) 02:58, 27 May 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 14:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Norbourne Estates, Kentucky (1st) choice or Norborne (2nd choice). I can see this word as a plausible misspelling for either of those terms, and honestly when I first saw it it didn't make me think of Middle-earth that much. Apparently, in that context, it's a river located in the Shire, but it doesn't seem crucial to the legendarium's main stories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonic678 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY given that it's a plausible misspelling of multiple things, but not the correct spelling of anything about which Wikipedia has any information to offer our readers. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirects that are oommon misspellings, such as this one, are not usually deleted. Norbourne is often spelled without the "e". --Bejnar (talk) 15:51, 7 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.

Clearances[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. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this redirect to Clearance instead per WP:PLURALPT and WP:DABCOMBINE? Highland Clearances seems like a PTM even though the Highland Clearances is an important event in Scottish history. The DAB page does list numerous other uses though only Clearance (pharmacology) is titled "Clearance(s)" it seems likely some of the others are common/important enough for there to be no primary topic and usually singular and plural point to the same place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, people commonly refer to "the clearances", although the term "Highland clearances" is also in use. Both terms should lead to the same article to avoid confusing readers. This redirect has been in place since 2007 and to change it now would be needlessly disruptive. --94.197.89.137 (talk) 16:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe in the UK (and in particular Scotland) but probably not in other parts of the world. Similar to the fact that people outside Louisville would not readily identify Louisville Zoo as the "Zoo". Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:31, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. "The Clearances" refers to the Highland Clearances; "Clearances" without the definite article could refer to any number of things on the DAB page and is ambiguous. WP article titles are chosen to be precise; when the context is clear, e.g. copyright or engineering, people refer to the topic by the single word. (Full disclosure: I'm half-Scottish.) Narky Blert (talk) 17:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes I'm partly Scottish to and while I would think of the Highland Clearances first, I don't think everyone who either isn't interested in geography or in the UK. I make a lot of contributions to Scottish islands. Note that The Clearances redirects to the Highland Clearances which I think is sufficient since per WP:THE "Clearances" has a different (general) meaning. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. The DAB page is perfectly sufficient for someone who searched for "Clearances" and wanted "Highland Clearances". Having written a good chunk of Highland Clearances, I would be all for promoting the article, but not at the cost of the encyclopedia user's view of Wikipedia.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. Thanks for the nice (old meaning) discussion. Prior to seeing this I had not heard of The Highland Clearances. I generally thought of clearances as what happened on an old-time bank holiday, when all financial instruments were cleared through the issuing banks (i.e. banks cleared all inter-bank transactions) and all accounts were brought up-to-date. Hence clearing house. I agree that a broader view is appropriate. --Bejnar (talk) 21:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom, since there's no dominant meaning for the singular sense. —Lowellian (reply) 03:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The above arguments support redirecting the singular "clearance" to a disambiguation page, but this proposal is about the plural "clearances", for which the eviction from the rural parts of Scotland is the primary meaning, and surely the only meaning for which anyone would type the plural in the search box. Someone points out above that we have a redirect from "The Clearances", but that's not going to help anyone because no-one will type that to search. If this redirect has been in place since 2007, people will have got used to using it and there will be many links using it. Changing it now as proposed will be a hindrance to readers searching for information about the clearances, and would help nobody. (Note: the current Wikipedia page is called "Highland Clearances" with a capital "C", but the term is so established that a lower case "c" is often used. The text of the page varies inconsistently on this. And whilst the term "Highland clearances" is commonly used, sometimes just "clearances" is preferred because areas other than the Highlands were affected.) --188.30.171.198 (talk) 14:14, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The singular and plural are used interchangeably that's why. WP:THE specifies one of the reasons for including it is that a term has a different meaning without it which in this case would be clearances in general, those found on the DAB. Changing it would likely not be a hindrance since people are could easily be looking for something else and they won't have to go Highland Clearances>DAB>Intended article and those wanting Highland Clearances will still fund it on the DAB. Although areas outside the Highlands were affected "Highland Clearances" is still the common name in a general context. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:08, 30 May 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 14:02, 5 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.

Exception(computing)[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) 17:49, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Typo (missing blank). There is a parallel redirect Exception (computing). Tea2min (talk) 09:37, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Unnecessary clutter. Narky Blert (talk) 12:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Users who search with the malformed disambiguator would probably notice this, like I do. I predict that J947 will !vote to keep the redirect. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 18:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this typo is not needed. Autofill does its job, and the correct redirect pops out. --Bejnar (talk) 03:52, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I created this redirect 14 years ago. It was a different time.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:51, 8 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.

May 2020 Central Park confrontation[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 Central Park birdwatching incident. --BDD (talk) 17:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect. Target article does not have a #May_2020_encounter section heading, and did not have one when the redirect was created. Google shows no external websites using this phrase. Geo Swan (talk) 02:42, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - The section heading is no longer there because the content was merged into another section. I'll be fixing that. As for the category name, it can be renamed to fit Google Search findings, but I think this was a notable incident in the context of racism and discrimination that has popped up again in U.S. society. While it's not notable enough to have its own article, I think a redirect is perfectly appropriate to indicate an acknowledgment of this incident. Love of Corey (talk) 02:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no redirect history worth saving. q.v. This is what happens when editors ignore WP:NOTNEWS. --Bejnar (talk) 03:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How? The incident has been covered by multiple WP:RS. Love of Corey (talk) 01:37, 8 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_June_5&oldid=962336906"