Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 20, 2023.

Wikipedia:Huff policy[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. Consensus to delete, no incoming links Fuzheado | Talk 14:37, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even more absurd than the previous discussion on WP:HUFF, this should be deleted since we certainly have no policy that could be described or referred to as "the Huff policy". Also zero incoming links whatsoever, despite the fact that it was created in 2008.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  23:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Unlike the below this cannot be mistaken for the Huffpost. --(Roundish ✡t) 00:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. It wouldn't surprise me if we have some guideline or essay somewhere advising people not to huff and puff, but if we do I can't find it and even if we do have that it is definitely not going to be a policy. Thryduulf (talk) 00:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Wikipedia:HUFF[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 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#HuffPost. (non-admin closure) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect doesn't make sense to me. Only link to this redirect is from an AN/I comment that sarcastically asserts that Wikipedia should create a 'Hurt and Upset Feelings Festival' noticeboard. IDK what should be done with this redirect, but certainly the status quo cannot continue.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  23:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Vanniar(Sri Lanka)[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. Complex/Rational 23:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Vanniar (Sri Lanka), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Maidan(Kolkata)[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. Complex/Rational 23:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Maidan (Kolkata), is the target of the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Humanity(album)[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. Complex/Rational 23:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Humanity (album), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Love Bites(Judas Priest song)[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. Complex/Rational 23:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Love Bites (Judas Priest song), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:09, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Persia (Iran)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Persia (Iran)

Photographs(song)[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. Complex/Rational 23:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Photographs (song), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Gatsby(Sandwich)[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. Complex/Rational 23:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Gatsby (Sandwich), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Yellow Top[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Yellow Top

East Croydon[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. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't make sense to put a redirect of a whole place to a train station. It would probably be more appropriate to redirect to Croydon. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 18:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I don't know if you're a local, but I don't believe this term is generally used to describe the wider area - the only mentions of an "East Croydon" in the Croydon article are references to the train station. (By way of contrast, "South Croydon" is described in the Croydon article as being an area of the town, and it has a full article.) Belbury (talk) 19:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Belbury: Yes, I am a local (from Selsdon). I have never heard anyone call the station "East Croydon". Furthermore, I have heard many people say they live in East Croydon. It's weird to redirect a place name to a railway station. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 18:38, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Entirely depends on whether or not East Croydon is used as a area/neighborhood of Croydon. Even if it's used as such, but very uncommonly, the station would probably the primary topic and this would be an appropriate redirect. Skynxnex (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Skynxnex: As a Croydon resident, it is (though somewhat rarely afaik). It would therefore be more appropriate to redirect to Croydon or dabify — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 18:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is no such place as East Croydon - the station is named such because it's on the eastern edge of the town centre and the need to distinguish it from West Croydon station on the western edge of the town centre (and briefly Central Croydon railway station). Thryduulf (talk) 20:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As a Croydon resident, the only relevance "East Croydon" has to anything is a railway station, a tram stop and a bus station (and I use the term "bus station *very* loosely...!). Anyone looking for East Croydon would be more likely to just go to East Croydon railway station or some such. IMO the redirect serves very little purpose - the term on its own is rarely used (only referring specifically to one of the three above). Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 20:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you are arguing that East Croydon do refer primarily to East Croydon station, but still the redirect to East Croydon station needs to be deleted, which is somewhat illogical. Hzh (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the user is trying to say that it isn't really used as a neighbourhood name (which I somewhat disagree with), but no one would use the redirect. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 18:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If a term exists (many transport websites do use just "East Croydon" - [1][2], [3]), then the redirect will be used. A check of page usage do show that it is used even if not frequently. Hzh (talk)
Stations are ambiguous without the work "station" or similar, as can be seen on the names of the station and some other Wikipedia languages have station at "X" or "X (railway station)" or similar. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or disambiguate East Croydon is a term used frequently by Croydon locals and Londoners alike (as is West Croydon), so it doesn't make sense to delete it. It is often used to mean the station. It can also used to refer to the area around the station, see for example the East Croydon Masterplan released by Croydon Council [4], even though AFAIK the area is not an officially defined place. The tram stop and bus station also exist, but they are located right outside East Croydon station, and you can see the name of both the tram and bus stops as a reference to the train station. You can see from the usage that it refers directly or indirectly to the train station, so the redirect isn't that wrong. But given the possible confusion, turning it into a disambiguation page as done for Croydon East is a possibility. Hzh (talk) 16:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The East Croydon station article is about both the railway and tram stations and the adjacent "bus station" (although calling it such is a stretch) so there isn't anything to disambiguate with. At the very most a hatnote to the former constituency can be added, but the station is by far the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 18:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It is given in TfL website as a bus station [5], so its status as a bus station is official. People also do use it to mean the area around the railway station, even if the area is not clearly defined. Hzh (talk) 19:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep it seems to be the only use and a redirect to the town doesn't seem helpful as you are unlikely to be looking for the area in general if you include "East". The only mentions of "East Croydon" in the Croydon article are for the station. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as a Croydon resident for more than 20 years, I can confirm that East Croydon's only meaning is in connection with the station. Just the same as with 'West Croydon'. Even with the influx of residents in the multi-coloured towers which have sprouted in recent years, I have yet to hear 'East Croydon' used in the sense of a residential area. If you live up by the station, you'll say it like that. Equally, if someone says I'm going to or getting off at 'East Croydon', it's the station that they mean. Lamberhurst (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who doesn't live in Croydon but knows people who lived there their entire lives (some over 7 decades), I have heard them referring to East Croydon as a general area, e.g. "the bank in East Croydon". Hzh (talk) 00:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's no bank in 'East Croydon', it's George Street and there's only the Coop left after Lloyd's closed a while back. I've heard locals refer to the area starting from the east of the 50p tower as Addiscombe but never 'East Croydon'. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
People who lived in Croydon their entire lives would have known a period when there was a bank in East Croydon. Lloyds' closure is quite a recent event from their perspective. They often refer to George Street as the part near to Whitgift Centre, simply because if they want to give you direction to a place, they would refer to the station if it's a place nearer to the station. I was talking to someone and he said George Street is both Central Croydon and East Croydon. The same applies to West Croydon, it may be mentioned as a general area, in fact they often refer to West Croydon as the bus station rather than the train station since locals may use the bus station more than the train station. Hzh (talk) 12:12, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So in other words, locals use "East Croydon" primarily to mean things covered by our East Croydon station article and sometimes to give directions to things in Croydon that are near the things covered in that article. This all speaks to the station article being the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 13:17, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate, having gone through and amended the 20 incoming links to East Croydon, about half were not about the station itself, rightly or wrongly, the area surrounding the station appears to be commonly referred to as East Croydon. Disambiguating along the lines of West Croydon would minimise the chances of incorrect linking in the future. Homoeper (talk) 02:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'd love to see some discussion of the usage of the term in reliable sources. A lot of the discussion so far has been on anecdotes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Yomi(YuYu Hakusho)[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. Complex/Rational 23:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Yomi (YuYu Hakusho), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Warcraft(film)[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. Complex/Rational 23:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Warcraft (film), is the target of the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Template:R from native name[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. After two relists, there remains no consensus to make any changes. signed, Rosguill talk 21:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Propose retargeting to {{R from alternative language}}. The use of these aliases imply that the redirect is not just from another name, it is from a name in the native/local language, to the more common name, most often in English. Place Clichy (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment A consequence of doing that will be that it will suddenly become a whole lot of calls to {{R from alternative language}} with missing language parameters; proper usage of that template looks like {{R from alternative language|fr|en}} when the redir is French and the target is English. How much that extra mess would matter is really up to the people who do cleanup work with regard to that.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:48, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Paine Ellsworth is someone who does quite a bit of work with redirect categories so their opinion regarding SMcCandlish's observation seems worthwhile knowing. Thryduulf (talk) 23:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, editor Thryduulf for thinking of me! Editor SMcCandlish is of course correct. It looks like there were two editors involved in making these, and both editors are now blocked. Apparently the idea was to make a new rcat template, perhaps {{R from native name}}, which would sort redirects to Category:Redirects from native names as a subcategory of Category:Redirects from alternative names. These redirects, if we are justified in keeping them, should continue to target the alt-name rcat template, because they do not clash with the alt-language categories. The alt-lang rcat template and the alt-name rcat template can both be used together to tag appropriate redirects, because neither is a subcategory nor parent category of the other. Since I count sixty redirects that are tagged with these, I suggest we keep these as they are and discuss the creation of the new rcat template and category. If editors don't want to create the rcat template and category, then these four can either be kept (my preference) or orphaned and deleted. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 16:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just for clarity, what are "the new rcat template and category"?  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:20, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The new rcat could be the first redirect, {{R from native name}}, and its new cat would be Category:Redirects from native names. If this is done, then the other three rcat redirects would be retargeted to the new rcat template. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 18:58, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Paine Ellsworth: I came across redirect Kuvendi Popullor, which is an Albanian name for the Parliament of Albania, and wanted to categorize it accordingly. I was surprised to find that "native name" rcat aliases pointed to a very generic template that's not about languages, and ended up using {{R from alternative language}}. Even though the proposed retargeting would indeed end up in some calls to calls to {{R from alternative language}} with no language specified (not a whole lot), I feel that would still be an improvement. (Plus a number aren't actually native or local names: Viktor Orban, Bore, Eugene, Maltese Language Academy.) If we want better than that, 2 options available:
    1. Redirect to {{R from alternative language}} and manually set a language parameter on the incoming links.
    2. Create a new rcat {{R from native name}} similar to the current 'alternative language' one, as explained above by Paine Ellswoth. I suggest a single language parameter, with wording such as if the redirect target is in a language other than English, use {{R from alternative language}} instead.
    I'm willing to do either the clean-up in option 1 or the writing of the template in option 2 if that helps. However, I find that either plainly deleting these aliases or keeping them pointing where they are are worse solutions. Place Clichy (talk) 23:19, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Place Clichy: your example is both an alternative name and in a language alternative to English; therefore, both rcat templates should be applied. Editors have been using the redirect rcat templates apparently in anticipation that a new rcat template, perhaps {{R from native name}} with its category, Redirects from native names, would be created. If we decide not to create those, then I think these rcat template redirects should remain as they are – they should stay targeted to the more general {{R from alternative name}}. For me, the bottom line is that native names are not necessarily in a different language. Native names do not have to be in a language that is different from English, such as "The Big Smoke" for London, or "Gotham" for New York City. So native names are always alt names or nicknames, but not always in a different language. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any more comments on the creation of a new Rcat?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose native or local name could be a dialectal name, and not a different language name, which could be absent an ISO 639 code, thus unable to use the alternate language tag -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 03:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for your participation! To clarify, please see {{R from alternative language}}, which guides us to use the argument "und" ("undetermined") for the from (|1=und) and the to (|2=und) parameters when a language(s) cannot be determined. In many cases the parent language is used if a dialect has no ISO id code. So for any language or dialect that is alternative to English, known or unknown, the alternative language tag should be used to categorize the redirect. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • This "other language" category "und" should have additional parameters to specify what it is, if known, so that if such a langauge code were to be created later, they could possibly be categoirzed properly later. (ie. en-GB and en-AU can specify dialects, which are not supported, so "und" code goes in |1= and |2= but additional |details1= and |details2= could specify such. If it really undetermined, or if it is in Ebonics or Boston English or Cockney slang instead, or the local population's nickname for the term in question. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 08:38, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Place Clichy: How would you like to proceed, since it is time to close this discussion? Are you going to create the {{R from native name}} and redirect the others to it per Paine? Jay 💬 08:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Autonomous regions with special statute(Italy)[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. Complex/Rational 23:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Autonomous regions with special statute (Italy), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

List of least polluted (and most polluted) cities by particulate matter concentration[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 21:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as List of most-polluted cities by particulate matter concentration exists too, and this is an unlikely search term to turn into a disambiguation page. GnocchiFan (talk) 12:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I tend to say keep. See WP:R#KEEP point 3, 4 (“redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted”), 5 (“Someone finds them useful”) and 6. And for point 5, you can see from the page view statistics that for every four people who visited the page in the past 3 months, one of them visited through the redirect. Dustfreeworld (talk) 13:34, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create an index or dab for lists of cities by pollution and retarget this there. Thryduulf (talk) 14:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The nominated page has likely been receiving traffic because it had over 160 incoming links. I updated the links in two navigation templates, which took care of most of them, but there are other incoming links. We might want to wait and see what happens after all of the links are updated. If the traffic dies down, we can safely delete this as a WP:XY situation. - Eureka Lott 04:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the links for the rest. Jay 💬 06:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Pageviews have been the lowest so far since then, including 0 views for a day. I would go for delete, but in the case this discussion closes with a non-delete outcome, maybe wait a month, confirm 0 pageviews and renominate. Jay 💬 07:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete WP:XY, not a plausible search term. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It is however plausible that there are incoming links (and bookmarks, etc) from when there was content at this title. Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per LaundryPizza03. I don't find the idea of other incoming links at all compelling; it could be said of any redirect, and the article was only created in April of this year and moved in July. That's the blink of an eye compared to the project's history. --BDD (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; has existed for hardly any time, and this is not the type of XY redirect that would be helpful to preserve. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:47, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. SouthParkFan2006 (talk) 18:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Scour(band)[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. Complex/Rational 23:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Scour (band), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Zakariya(New Testament figure)[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. Complex/Rational 23:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Zakariya (New Testament figure), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Interstate 63[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Interstate 63

Sol Pendavis Williams[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Sol Pendavis Williams

Scrubs(series)[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. Complex/Rational 23:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the extra space between the title and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Scrubs (series), is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Neetika[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Neetika

Rick’s Place[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. {{R to article without mention}} (non-admin closure) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 06:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target; unhelpful. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 21:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep: I came across this a bit ago during NPP, but wasn't sure what action to take on it. It is a real place in Prospect Park and the New York Times has a bit of coverage of it here[1], but none of it is at the article. I voted weak keep as I couldn't figure out a way myself to integrate this information into the article cleanly, but I think it could be done; I just pretty rarely write about parks. TartarTorte 23:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Pollack, Michael (28 November 2013). "Who was Rick of Rick's Place in Prospect Park". New York Times.
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Green Gully Reserve[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 Keilor Downs, Victoria. No further discussion is needed. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal that the redirect be retargeted to Keilor Downs, Victoria, as the reserve has other uses. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep based on my reasoning at the AfD. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments and retarget @Presidentman: You want to keep based on your reasoning over that the other tenant is not notable? What tenant would that be? Besides, do you even know what Green Gully Reserve is? It's not a stadium, there is a stadium in it, but it is not a stadium. Per my update to Keilor Downs, Victoria The Green Gully Reserve area is a former tip site turned into a nature reserve.[1] Since 2011 the reserve has had over 9,000 seedlings planted to reforest the area.[1] There are multiple areas in the reserve including walking-cycling tracks,[2] and an off leash dog area,[3][4] Plus much more, including the stadium and other pitches. Regards. Govvy (talk) 13:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The consensus at AfD was to redirect to the current target. A deletion review (initiated by you) affirmed this. Frankly, I find this RfD to be a disruptive attempt to challenge consensus that has now been established twice. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Enforcing a close is not enforcing consensus. I am frankly bemused by the whole situation. There is a great big park in Keilor Downs, I am surprised how many people are just ignoring the fact. Govvy (talk) 11:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Presidentman, to be clear, I initiated this RfD as part of my closure of the DRV. Alpha3031 (t • c) 06:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    RfD trumps AfD several times over as a venue to discuss redirects. J947 † edits 23:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom, and Govvy's updates at Keilor Downs following the AfD close. The reserve should target the suburb it is in, not a football club that uses the reserve's name. Jay 💬 13:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b https://anglopac.com.au/environmental/articles.php?story=26
  2. ^ https://www.alltrails.com/trail/australia/victoria/green-gully-walk
  3. ^ https://www.melbourneplaygrounds.com.au/green-gully-reserve-dog-off-leash-area-keilor-downs
  4. ^ "green gully reserve, keilor downs". mammaknowsnorth.com.au. Retrieved 29 September 2023.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 17:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No comments since the last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

💁‍♀️[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. (sigh) (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

unclear, delete per WP:REMOJI MicrobiologyMarcus (petri dish•cultures) 13:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MicrobiologyMarcus, @Yoblyblob would both of you be ok if I bundled these two discussion and also nominated and bundled 💁 as it's the same emoji as this and the one below and also targets Presentation? TartarTorte 17:08, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would help save space @MicrobiologyMarcus Yoblyblob (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good with me, probably goes without saying but I am in favour of delete the third emoji as well. MicrobiologyMarcus (petri dish•cultures) 17:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Help desk or to the relevant emoji page. The emoji is defined as "Information desk person", Information desk is a redirect to Help desk, so that seems the most useful target - especially as it contains links to other plausible things like Customer service and Technical support. This applies to all the variations of the emoji (which should be bundled). Thryduulf (talk) 17:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Funnily enough, that was the original target of this redirect when it got deleted back in 2017. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:34, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete emoji is not defined to be a presentation specific emoji Yoblyblob (talk) 14:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is why I recommended retargetting to the relevant target. Thryduulf (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As "relevent" as any interpretation of an emoji can be. As I say in my comment below, these redirects are worthless and of no good to the project. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably a good idea to also bundle 💁, which was previously deleted in 2017 at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_September_10#💁. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I boldly nominated 💁 and merged all three discussions. TartarTorte 18:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @MicrobiologyMarcus: WP:REMOJI is just an essay that needs to be updated and doesn't represent any precedent in reality. If you take a look, all of the examples presented except for the nonce emoji/text combination are in fact live redirects. Enix150 (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I'm fine with redirecting elsewhere, but I believe that deleting these pages would make them the only emojis without redirects on Wikipedia. This is probably why every other emoji redirect discussion brought up this year has concluded in a keep/retarget decision. (See prior discussions here: 🤭, 👩‍💻, 🛋️, ⏫/⏬, 🫸/🫷, 🤪, & 🙀) Enix150 (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Help desk. Per Thryduulf, I think this would be a more suitable target. I hadn't realized their original definition. Enix150 (talk) 20:25, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose deletion, and at this point I do think an RfC would be good to figure out which emojis should generally exist as redirects / which emojis should generally be deleted, in order to simplify discussions in the future. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Help desk per Thryduulf or to the relevant emoji page. Gonnym (talk) 00:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Come on. It's a person with one hand raised. How does this unambiguously refer to "Help desk" or any other target? It does not. Emoji redirects are fundamentally extremely vague, as their interpretation is wholly subjective and all these attempts to save them from deletion will only result in another discussion like this two years down the road, because someone decided that this discussion's Retarget Of The Day isn't helpful. When it comes to emojis, a good redirect is a nonexistant redirect. And would make them the only emojis without redirects on Wikipedia has nothing to do with it; that is not a problem, as we have gone over far too many times before.
Another point is the sheer unlikeliness of someone using an emoji to search in an encyclopedia search engine. What are they looking for? I don't know, but it probably isn't "presentation" or "help desk".
We come back over and over again to the 'horrible vagueness of these emojis. These redirects are worthless, but they are worse than worthless, because there is no good target for an array of pixels, the display of which varies across devices, and the interpretation of which varies across individuals. I cannot fathom how such redirects are possible good for the project.
Utopes, an RfC on this topic has been proposed not long previously, by A smart kitten. I think it is a good idea, as it will attract attention outside of the RfD crowd. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unless, of course, we have some kind of "emoji disambiguation pages", something I decline to comment on. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:33, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Edward-Woodrow: All of these same arguments could be made regarding every Unicode character redirect on Wikipedia, but I don't think that those should be deleted either. Emojis all have definitions that are set when they are created. Having "information desk person" link to Help desk does not seem at all vague or confusing to me. Enix150 (talk) 21:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Help desk to match the original definition of "information desk person". I noted at the previous discussion that since "person tipping hand" has no logical target on Wikipedia, I think the "information desk person" definition would be the only one we can provide a target for. Doing so is more advantageous than deletion, which would provide nothing to a searcher. -- Tavix (talk) 18:58, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget to Help desk, delete, or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 02:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — let's give these emoji redirects one more shot.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

🫗[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. (sigh) (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another emoji; the definition of this emoji is "pouring liquid", of which there are multiple means of doing so, including Decantation. In other similar emoji discussions where I felt there existed appropriate titles for targets, I cannot say the same here, and I believe that retargeting to Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A is the best option per past discussions' consensus. (Although, perhaps a target of Decantation or Libation is clear enough in this instance.) Utopes (talk / cont) 05:20, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This discussion should probably be temporarily suspended since this RfC was opened on the topic. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:29, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This can probably be relisted again, or closed as no consensus... Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Too vague and would likely not be used in a legitimate mention of the subject. Yoblyblob (talk) 17:20, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or redirect. This, like other emojis, are valid search symbols. Gonnym (talk) 09:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — let's give these emoji redirects one more shot.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 19:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Transnistrian Ukrainian dialect[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. This is without prejudice to the creation of a redirect to Transnistria–Ukraine relations, which was proposed but not substantially discussed. signed, Rosguill talk 20:08, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Google Translate confuses the Ukrainian terms Наддністрянщина/Подністров'я (Naddnistrianshchyna/Podnistrovia) and Придністров'я (Prydnistrovya, more commonly Transnistria in English). Both regions have similar names because they run along the Dniester river (it's included in the name of both regions if you take a look). This article is about the dialect in Naddnistrianshchyna, which is not spoken in Transnistria as you can see on this map in the dialect's Ukrainian Wikipedia page: [6]. By the way, visiting the page you can see it yourself how Google automatically translates Наддністрянський (Naddnistryanskyy) as "Transnistrian", when this would be Придністровський (Prydnistrovskyy); as proof of the latter see these articles by Ukrinform (state media) which unequivocally refer to Transnistria and use Prydnistrovskyy [7]. With all this I think it has been shown this redirect is not appropriate. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've also nominated Transnistrian Ukrainian, it already had its own RfD discussion before [8], but conditions have changed and another nomination is due. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Ukrainian dialects where people using this search term (and Google Translate's usage is a clear reason why people are likely to) will find whatever dialect they actually mean. Thryduulf (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Transnistria is not mentioned in the article. There is no Transnistrian dialect of its own in Ukrainian. This name is WP:Original research. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Zero results for "Transnistrian Ukrainian dialect" in Google Scholar [9] and Google Books [10]. As for "Transnistrian Ukrainian", papers virtually universally refer to either Transnistria–Ukraine relations or Transnistria–Ukraine border [11] [12]. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Naddnistrianshchyna/Podnistrovia is the land over the Dniester, or the upper Dniester region. Transnistria is across the Dniester, from the Moldovan and Romanian POV (in Ukraine, Transnistria is part of the Prydnistrovia, the region by the Dniester). These regions are distinct and don’t overlap. I don’t know of the existence of a Transnistrian Ukrainian dialect, and that region of Moldova is adjacent to the Podillia dialect/Podillian dialect. The vague “Transnistrian Ukrainian” sounds more like a synonym for Ukrainians in Transnistria than anything. Second choice, redirect to Ukrainian dialects, but I don’t know if we should do this for apparently made-up names.  —Michael Z. 19:40, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Transnistrian Ukrainian" would rather mean the opposite, "Transnistrians in Ukraine", just like Ukrainian Americans is about "Americans who are of Ukrainian ancestry", which is something that will never get an article. I hadn't realised this in the last RfD but this is another argument favoring deletion. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 20:20, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the dialect per above. Retarget Transnistrian Ukrainian to Transnistria–Ukraine relations per Super. In the previous RfD, my suggestion was to hatnote Transnistria–Ukraine relations from the then target. Jay 💬 09:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Sahih al-Bayhaqi[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 per WP:CSK #4. Any editor in good standing may renominate the redirect. ✗plicit 14:37, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article Sunan al-Kubra (al-Bayhaqi) was disruptively moved to "Sahih al-Bayhaqi" by blocked sockpuppet Mohhsiinn. I haven't found the term "Sahih al-Bayhaqi" used in a single WP:RS; most use Sunan al-Kubra or Sunan al-Bayhaqi. The user may have intended to make al-Bayhaqi a sahih hadith book. Hezbollaist (talk (Contribs) 10:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Black witch[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#Black witch

SP-3000[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 28#SP-3000

Aata Houn Jau Dya[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 List of programmes broadcast by Star Pravah. Jay 💬 08:07, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

not mentioned at target -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:21, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk pages of the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per Lenticel. There isn't much there but there is enough to inform people what it is and give people more information with which to investigate further elsewhere making this a helpful target. Thryduulf (talk) 13:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Between Nov 16 and now this page was untagged due to an IP removing the RfD tag that was added when the page was originally nominated. I restored the tag. TartarTorte 16:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

When the president does it, its not illegal[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. Editors are evenly divided on whether to keep or delete. signed, Rosguill talk 20:05, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely search terms. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 03:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. First, the spelling/punctuation is wrong so it shouldn't stay under any circumstances. But second, people don't search Wikipedia for obscure quotes (we have Wikiquote for that), so delete rather than rename. Dan Bloch (talk) 04:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually people do search Wikipedia for obscure quotes, even though WikiQuote exists, partly because we do sometimes have encyclopaedic coverage of quotes and partly because not everybody knows that Wikiquote exists. Thryduulf (talk) 11:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Soft redirect to wikiquote? Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep These seem like plausible search terms. I'm not opposed to soft redirecting either. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 12:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Volufiline[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. ✗plicit 07:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This name is not listed on the target page. Based on a Google search, "Volufiline™ is sarsasapogenin extracted from the roots of Asian botanical Anemarrhena asphodeloides, in an oil-soluble excipient" UL Solutions. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it should probably be re-targeted to sarsasapogenin. I added the redirect while researching it, and found volufiline referred to as being the same as Zhi mu, which redirects to Anemarrhena. UltraMagnusspeak 14:04, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@UltraMagnus: Isn't sarsasapogenin a more generic target than the current one? sarsasapogenin is related to several plants, whereas Volufiline is related to Anemarrhena only? Jay 💬 14:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, a specific product name with no mention on enwiki. Jay 💬 08:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Jay. There is no point in redirecting to a page that does not mention the redirected product name. Felix QW (talk) 12:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no clear mention Yoblyblob (talk) 14:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 02:47, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Current head of state of Netherlands[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 List of current heads of state and government#N. While the !votes were quite split between deleting and retargeting by sheer number, I will note that the two main arguments presented by those proposing to delete — that no similar redirects exist, and that the target was liable to become outdated — were sufficiently rebutted. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No similar redirects exist. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus for retargeting seems to be forming, but it is currently unclear where this redirect should target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. MOS:CURRENT specifically discourages statements likely to become outdated, and by extension redirects like this should be avoided too. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There are at least three targets this could be targetted at that mean it will not become outdated meaning that is irrelevant. Thryduulf (talk) 04:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of current heads of state and government#N, where the subject is always going to be mentioned. As that list is maintained and constantly kept up-to-date, I don't see issues with recency occurring frequently so long as we point to that list. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If I wanted to know who is head of state of the Netherlands, now or at any future time, I would open the article Netherlands and scroll down the infobox until I came to the section Government and, under it, Monarch: Willem-Alexander or whatever that line would have become after Willem-Alexander's death or abdication. Or if I wanted to know who was head of state of the Netherlands at any time in the past, I would as a first trial browse to King of the Netherlands where the table of contents would direct me to King of the Netherlands#List of monarchs which has a list of all those who used that title plus a link to List of monarchs of the Netherlands which gives, in addition, the Napoleonic Kings of Holland and all stadtholders. — Tonymec (talk) 14:06, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • While you might do that, not everybody will (indeed I'd suggest that relatively few people will). See WP:R#KEEP point 5 (points 2 and 3 are also relevant). Thryduulf (talk) 11:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As pointed out that rationale is not relevant - all possible targets mean that the redirect will not be come outdated. Thryduulf (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Australia Jr, Fake Australia, Fake America[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. ✗plicit 07:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Original research. No any indication that those redirects are the alternative names of the countries. 132.234.229.241 (talk) 05:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, joke redirects. CMD (talk) 09:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, jokes, unlikely to be used in a legitimate search for the target. Yoblyblob (talk) 14:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: per WP:CHEAP, plausible search terms with consistently non zero page views (5-10 per month: [13]). Joseph2302 (talk) 16:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 19:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from the obvious joke redirect concern, Joseph2302, can you convincingly argue that these targets are the primary topics of the redirect titles? I mean, "Fake America" could mean anything. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

W.O.T.A.N.[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 29#W.O.T.A.N.

Shake spear[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! 07:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly implausible search term, people who searched this redirect would most likely be looking for something else. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 22:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete probably a joke redirect --Lenticel (talk) 01:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an unhelpful search term which is probably a joke. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 16:56, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it is quite possibly a valid spelling from Shakespere's own time. If you look at File:King_Lear_Q1.jpg it is spelled as "Shak-speare", while other times, it is [14][15] Shakesspere, Shakysper, Shaxpeer, Schakespeire, Shackper, Shaxkspere, Shakspeyre; and there are other variants that abound, both used by the Bard himself and by others of his time to write about him -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 12:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a plausible search term by readers who have no idea how to spell it. I can't imagine who would type this expecting to find someone or something else, so I don't buy the premise of the nomination. I also don't think it's likely to have been created as a joke, unless some evidence of the creator's intention comes to light—and irrespective of the creator's intention, if it occasionally helps readers find the right article, and can't be shown to misdirect readers expecting to find something else—I have no idea what that would be—then it's still a keep. P Aculeius (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seems pretty insulting to the RfD regular who made this that this is referred to as a joke redirect. Think a second, please. J947 † edits 23:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per P Aculeius. This seems quite a plausible search term for a young reader and/or for someone new to English - Shakespeare is very definitely the sort of topic that such readers are likely to be searching for. Thryduulf (talk) 13:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: J947's comment caused me to look at the history of the redirect. It was only created on November 12, and was nominated for deletion fifteen minutes later. That would normally bother me, but Thryduulf's comment made me wonder: if someone hears the name "Shakespeare" but doesn't know the full name or how to spell it, and types "Shake..." and then hesitates, would they find William Shakespeare without this redirect?
Testing that hypothesis, I see that the pop-up list of results includes some topics related to Shakespeare—"Shakespeare's sonnets", "Shakespeare authorship question", and "Shakespeare's plays", but the top result is a disambiguation page for "Shake", which doesn't lead to Shakespeare, and other top results are "Shakers", "Shake it Off", Shake it Up, and "Shaken baby syndrome", along with Shakespeare in Love and Shakespeare & Hathaway, which are only tangentially related to the subject. The one topic that significantly does not appear is "William Shakespeare". The results improve slightly if you keep typing "...sp", but still don't bring up "William Shakespeare", just related articles. But oddly enough, if you type a space and then begin with "sp", "William Shakespeare" appears as the second result, between "Shakespeare's sonnets" and the redirect "Shake spear". At which point, the reader might guess that "William Shakespeare" is who they're looking for.
This result argues for keeping the redirect, even though it's likely that many people who see it won't click on it, because "William Shakespeare" appears next to it; without a space, the target doesn't even appear in the list until you've typed "Shakespeare". Even "Shakespear" doesn't bring it up: it brings up a disambiguation page and related topics, but not "William Shakespeare". Of course, by this point the reader is likely to click on the disambiguation page or one of the related articles, and should eventually get to the right article. But "Shake spear" may make that process faster and reduce the number of steps required. So notwithstanding the facts that it's not the most intuitive redirect, and that we've only had it for a week, it should probably be kept. P Aculeius (talk) 15:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth noting that search suggestions are only available for some methods of searching for Wikipedia content. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Iron Queen[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. Jay 💬 08:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not listed at target page, does not appear to be a reference to anything on the encyclopedia. TNstingray (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep refs exist. Eg Odisseus calls her "iron queen"[16].~— Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenmann (talk • contribs) 21:36, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:PRIMARY. I cannot find any reliable secondary sourcing that establishes the Iron Queen as a consistent title of Persephone relevant enough to have this redirect. In fact, I think it only appears this one type in the Odyssey. So it is misleading to have this as a redirect. TNstingray (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It is not a literal translation of any phrase in Homer's Odyssey, so far as I can tell. It seems to be a phrase Fitzgerald uses to translate ἀγαυὴ Περσεφόνεια (agaue Persephoneia) in Odyssey XI 214[17]. The new Cambridge Greek Lexicon offers illustrious, noble, glorious, remarkable or extraordinary for ἀγαυὴ; Fitzgerald seems to have taken poetic licence for his translation. NebY (talk) 13:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the primary topic appears to be a novel in the The Iron Fey series, but as that only gets a single paragraph plot summary I'm not sure it is a great target. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Along with The Iron Fey, there's also New Birmingham, Texas, which was apparently nicknamed the "iron queen". The novel seems to be primary, though. I'm inclined to retarget to The Iron Fey and possibly add a hatnote pointing to New Birmingham, Texas. As "iron queen" as an epithet for Persephone apparently appears only once in a single translation of the Odyssey, and is not a literal translation of the Greek text, I am not sure how useful it is to keep any reference there. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment To me it sounds like the Iron Queen should be a disambiguation page, as there is basis for a fictional character, and possible real historical figures. Govvy (talk) 14:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A dab has been created below the redirect, but there isn't enough support for disambiguating (at least not yet).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Converted into multi-item dab page per November 20 discussion. - Altenmann >talk 04:32, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per above. Thryduulf (talk) 13:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Lactanus[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 List of Roman agricultural deities. Jay 💬 08:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not listed at target, and I can't find anything relevant via Google (Lactarius is a variety of fungi, but the spelling is too different). TNstingray (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just so, edited my post accordingly. P Aculeius (talk) 03:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on retargeting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Clarification: retarget to List of Roman agricultural deities, since that's where Lactans and Lacturnus are mentioned. At some point an article might be created for them, along with Lactantia, mentioned in the DGRBM article covering all three of them. If and when that happens, the redirect can be retargeted there; but for now, to the article that mentions them. P Aculeius (talk) 15:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_November_20&oldid=1188813872"