Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 8, 2023.

Hatnote[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Hatnote

Hindu language[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Hindu language

Subtropical Storm 90L[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 23:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, this is a direct violation of the use of invest numbers, and secondly, it is virtually certain that 90L will be reused in the future, possibly for another (incipient) subtropical storm. Let's not cause readers confusion here. Jasper Deng (talk) 20:16, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: a general invest designation that is reused multiple timers during an Atlantic hurricane season and serves no useful purpose as a redirect to any one specific article. Drdpw (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Misleading and potentially ambiguous. The subtropical storm was never referred to as "90L" only, as far as I know. CycloneYoris talk! 22:33, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, and above comments. Shouldn't have an invest number when it is already considered a subtropical cyclone. 🌀CycloneFootball71🏈 |sandbox 23:43, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Drdpw. ~ HikingHurricane (contribs) 00:19, 9 September 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).

Bechelo[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. Jay 💬 05:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect, no mention of the title of this redirect is found in the article. EggRoll97 (talk) 18:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I think it's meant to be a phonetic redirect, based on the creator's other creations around the same time (e.g. Attegrat → Adigrat, Baheerdar → Bahir Dar). I don't think it's correct, though, at least it doesn't look like how I would pronounce it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Bechelo is an archaic name for what is now called the Bashilo River, which is one of the major rivers of Ethiopia. I came across this variant name in the 2005 historical novel "Flashman on the March," which takes place during Sir Robert Napier's 1868 British Expedition to Abyssinia, which was undertaken to rescue a group of missionaries and British government personnel who were being held prisoner by Emperor Tewodros II of Abyssinia.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Abyssinia
    There are 24 mentions of the Bechelo River in "Flashman on the March."
    It is helpful to understand that the premise of the Flashman Papers is that they are transcribed directly from the memoirs of Sir Harry Flashman, a fictional British army officer who served between 1839 and 1894, which is why many place names in the books have the spellings appropriate for that era.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flashman_Papers
    It is also helpful to understand that, while Flashman himself is fictional, most of the events in the stories are accurate retellings of historical events. The value of "Bechelo" forwarding to "Bashilo River" is that someone reading something like the Flashman Papers can use Wikipedia to connect descriptions of events which use the archaic names to modern places. This makes such works even better at teaching about history.
    It is not just the Flashman Papers or historical novels that this applies to. Anyone who reads works of history which were written in the past can benefit from being able to link archaic and present geographical names. Before the Flashman book, I read "With Napoleon in Russia," the memoirs of General de Caulaincourt, who was Napoleon's personal aide during his invasion of Russia in 1812. That book describes the campaign in great detail, but it refers to places in Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, and Russia using the names that a Frenchman would have used in 1812. I did not add every one of those place names to Wikipedia, but I added enough of the most significant ones to make it easier for a modern reader to follow along with the movements of the army.
    This spelling also appears in "A Narrative Of Captivity In Abyssinia With Some Account Of The Late Emperor Theodore, His Country And People" by Henry Blanc, who was one of the captives who were being rescued. Blanc's book may have been a source for George MacDonald Fraser in writing "Flashman on the March." There are also multiple references to the Bechelo River in the Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society and the Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London, both from the 1860s. Alexa003 (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    TL;DR - Not a hypothetical phonetic variation. Bechelo is a variant spelling used in the mid-nineteenth century, which can be documented. The same is true of Attegrat/Adigrat and Baheerdar/Bahir Dar. Alexa003 (talk) 00:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep, per this explanation (WP:RFD#K5). @Alexa003: are any of the sources for these archaic names available online? It would be useful information to include in the article. Many geographic features have an "etymology" section documenting former names, archaic names, or names in native languages. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:49, 9 September 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).

LATAM[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16#LATAM

Eric Carman[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete. CSD G7 Liz Read! Talk! 20:32, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any evidence that the singer in question ever went by the first name Eric. BangJan1999 18:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. Delete it as there was a confusion with the singer Eric Carmen. Thanks and God bless! Antonio Carmen, not Carman Martin (queeeee?) 18:54, 9 September, 2023 (UTC)
  • The move to "Eric Carman" was a move bordered more on personal opinions than facts as WP requires, not that I did it anyway. Ping an admin as well for a technical solution to this as an adddon. Intrisit (talk) 19:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the mononymous singer that is the current target was not named Eric as far as I can tell, and as far as plausible errors this could refer to Eric Carmen or Eric Cartman just as easily. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:15, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ivanvector. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 19:24, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete: tagged for WP:G7 as creator of redirect has supported deletion with no one else supporting keeping or retargetting. TartarTorte 20:26, 8 September 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).

Micropore[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 withdrawn (and also Keep since this completed its discussion). Jay 💬 06:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The brand name Micropore currently redirects to Microporous material, while the longer brand name (or derived term) Micropore Hypoallergenic Skin Tape redirects to Surgical tape. Opening this RfD in order to determine a common target, as I believe they should both redirect to the same target (potentially with one of them as tagged as an {{a2r}}). All the best, A smart kitten (talk) 17:45, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • No change. Considering that micropore is an English word, not just a brand name,[1] both redirects seem appropriate as they are. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 18:04, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @CopperyMarrow15: Sorry for any confusion - I think these should be kept, but should both point to the same target. I therefore opened this RfD with the intention of hopefully gaining consensus for a common target. Apologies if I was unclear earlier. Best, A smart kitten (talk) 18:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • That was already clear; thank you. In saying "Keep", I meant that I argue that both redirects are already okay. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you are arguing that the trademark Micropore Hypoallergenic Skin Tape is synonymous with the word micropore, hence your use of the phrases "longer brand name" and "brand name" to describe them respectively and your stated goal of "determin[ing] a common target". However, I argue that the word micropore does not necessarily refer to the trademark, hence its inclusion in various dictionaries. Thus, the trademark name – which clearly refers to a brand of surgical tape – is okay to redirect there; and the word micropore – which primarily refers to microporous material – is okay to redirect there. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 19:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also that’s interesting in that it seems from that link to be both a trademark and an English word - I wonder if the trademark led to the increased use of the word, or maybe the other way around? A smart kitten (talk) 18:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yep! My argument is essentially based on the idea that a real English word is a more suitable primary topic than a trademark that occasionally uses the word for its branding, and that the two subjects of this discussion are thus unrelated. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 19:06, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No change "Micropore" is also a generic name for a type of nucleic acid (DNA and similar) sequencing equipment and techniques to use them. Invasive Spices (talk) 19:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: If there are no objections, I’m happy to withdraw this. I think originally I was under the misapprehension that Micropore was only a brand name - thank you CopperyMarrow15 for the help and clarification there! All the best, user:A smart kittenmeow 15:03, 14 September 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).

5G conspiracy theories in Maryland[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 23:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no information at the target specifically about Maryland. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 17:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all - I don't know why there's anything special about 5G misinformation in Maryland specifically, and the article does not explain. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is no information specifically about Maryland. I don't know if there was at the time that I created them. There have been edits and page moves in the intervening time so I'm uncertain about that. Invasive Spices (talk) 19:25, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Invasive Spices: running a wikiblame doesn’t find any matches for ‘maryland’ in the page history, so unless I’m accidentally misusing the tool (which is always possible!), it doesn’t look like there would have been. All the best, user:A smart kittenmeow 23:19, 8 September 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).

Indiom[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 23:24, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could also be a misspelling/mispronunciation of Idiom. 123957a (talk) 12:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep redirect to Indium. Misspelling of the element is much more likely, due to its phonetic similarity. Polyamorph (talk) 12:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If you type Indiom on Google Translate, it says "Did you mean: Idiom". 123957a (talk) 04:15, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But "-ium" is a predictable suffix for chemical elements, which makes it less likely. 123957a (talk) 09:48, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure what google translate has to do with it, "-ium" is only predictable if the user can 1) spell 2) knows the periodic table. I can see the feasibility of "indiom" as a misspelling, I can't see how it would be feasibile for a user to misspell "idiom" the same way, unless their cat jumps on the keyboard, or similar. Polyamorph (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because there are much more words starting with "ind" than those that start with a "short i" followed by d (such as idiom), and "ind" is easy to pronounce, easier than, say, "Ibdiom". 123957a (talk) 06:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Huh? Don't follow. Idiom doesn't start "Ind", Indium does. Not convinced. Polyamorph (talk) 10:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is one letter off of two plausible targets, "indium" and "idiom". Phonetic similarity I don't think is reason enough to keep here, as the typo is in a word that is small enough to infringe upon other words' spelling mistakes, in this case "idiom". Something of an WP:XY situation but with spelling. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's a plausible WP:XY situation, as "-ium" is a predictable suffix for chemical elements, so is less likely to be misspelled. 123957a (talk) 09:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, there are many words starting with "ind", so it's more likely than, say, "Ibdiom". 123957a (talk) 09:52, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. "Indiom" sounds like "Indium". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete most Google results when searching "Indiom" are nto even related to the element. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Shhhnotsoloud. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:46, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's the most likely misspelling. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete On its face it looks like a plausible misspelling of the element, but Ghits indeed think one means "Idiom". Misspelling redirects only make sense when it is unambiguous to what they refer, which does not seem to be the case here; otherwise they are more likely to lead to astonishment than be helpful. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:26, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY: equally likely to be an error for indium and for idiom, and page view stats show it's being used for neither. WP:RFD#D1 applies. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:02, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: so far, "keep" and "delete" have even numbers of votes (there was a nice alternating effect, but we seem to have lost that). Can four editors !vote "retarget" or "disambiguate" to tie up consensus even further? [Humor] Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:XY. There was one use of the word "indiom(s)" in Wikipedia. It was a typo of idiom. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Accidentally typing an n when trying to spell idiom is unnatural, and no other such redirects exist for any other elements: Heliom does not redirect to Helium, and Lithiom does not redirect to Lithium. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 16:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:35, 8 September 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).

Lemon (anime)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Glossary of anime and manga#Other terms. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in article Qwv (talk) 09:51, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete seems to be a slang for fan fic that are explicit. Seems to be an obscure synonym to fan generated hentai at best. --Lenticel (talk) 00:36, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a real thing (here's a user-generated (ie unusable) source, though it matches my recollection). No mention at the jawiki equivalents for Lemon or Lemon (disambiguation), nor at English or Japanese wiktionaries, for the little that's worth. Also there's a stub from 2002-2006 in the history there, if anyone cares. Gripping hand, the disambiguator in the title makes this into a terrible redirect. Delete. —Cryptic 00:59, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Fan fiction#Terminology, where the usage of the terms "lemon" and "lime" in this context are discussed. Tevildo (talk) 12:04, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm also fine with this retarget proposal. --Lenticel (talk) 01:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • They're specifically discussed in the subsection #Smut, which is a good deal lower; why not target there directly? —Cryptic 03:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      "Smut", unlike "lemon", isn't really a term that's specific to fanfic - the entry in the "Terminology" section might change at some point, especially if someone does a complete writeup on the citrus scale. I still think that targetting the section as a whole is a better idea. However, I won't object if consensus is to change to the more specific target. Tevildo (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants are currently split between deleting and retargeting, though a consensus for retargeting seems to be forming…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:55, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:33, 8 September 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).

The Attack (TV Series 2015)[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. Restoring the article seems to be the most-supported WP:ATD. I'll leave the filing of the WP:AFD for someone who is interested in seeing it through. I've also moved the two unrelated edits from '06-'07 to The Attack. -- Tavix (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect used to be an article (though completely unsourced), until it was prodded and redirected to the current target. It was then prodded again by User:Altenmann under the rationale no such series in 2015. It was in 2017. However, I've discovered that Kevin Pereira#Television acting roles And Twitch Roles claims that this series ran from 2015 to 2018, and that IMDb claims it ran from 2015 to 2017, so I don't know what to do with this redirect actually. Duckmather (talk) 23:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the previously deleted article said it was 2017 hence my prod. - Altenmann >talk 02:02, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The "Attack Wiki" (a Fandom wiki, not reliable) says the show premiered in Feb 2015. Reporting on a controversy with the show, Polygon.com reported that the show "launched" in 2014, but that doesn't necessarily conflict with premiering in 2015. The controversy led to the show shutting down in 2018, so that date checks out. I can't find much more on it, but at least it seems that the redirect is not provably wrong, and thus harmless. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ignores the fact that there's no useful information at the target. Delete. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 00:57, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you mean? The target hosts a table of Pereira's television roles in which the show is listed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but it doesn't actually tell the reader much. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There isn't much to tell, but the current target is where a reader will find it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Edward. The search function can also bring up the credits and this series should be a redlink to encourage article creation. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or restore and AfD. This has significant history that warrants a closer look. --Paul_012 (talk) 00:41, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:27, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Whether this goes to AfD and gets deleted, or not, surely this should be kept as an {{R with history}}? A smart kitten (talk) 13:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's only useful as an {{R with history}} if content from the history is used elsewhere on Wikipedia. It's really not the case here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't think that's what the licensing guidelines state, especially given the warning from the template itself. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore and send to AFD as it has been restored several times and was an article last month so in this case I agree RFD probably isn't the correct venue. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:25, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • When Altenmann created the redirect in 2006, it was titled "The Attack" and targeted to Der Angriff. The current The Attack targets the dab Attack which is understandable. Histmerge the pre-June 2023 revisions of The Attack (TV Series 2015) (when it used to be titled The Attack), to The Attack. The Attack (TV Series 2015) can then be deleted. It was a draft attempt by a newbie editor, which was then abandoned. Optionally, an interested editor may move it as a draft. As a redirect to Kevin Pereira, this redirect is not useful per Edward. Attack of the Show! could have been a target, if there was content on this TV series there. Jay 💬 19:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That wold be bizarre - it hides the existence of the page move, PROD (and this RfD) entirely for no clear reason. If I were to see that request when patrolling Category:Candidates for history merging I would decline it.
    Second option. Undo the move, and make the remnant page "The Attack (TV Series 2015)" go away. The page will be back at "The Attack" and can be targeted to Attack. Jay 💬 14:31, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD as the least-worst option. Given the recent BLAR and previously-contested PROD we shouldn't delete mainspace history here, the histmerge doesn't really work for reasons I explained above, and the redirect is not only barely-mentioned (as discussed above) but also not even the standard way we disambiguate these things. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:29, 20 September 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).

Mumbai Musical[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 unproduced DreamWorks Animation projects#Monkeys of Mumbai. Jay 💬 13:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Film title to studio redirect for a film not named in the target article to provide any context for why it redirects there. Upon investigation, the backstory is that this entered the production pipeline but got delayed, so it was summarily redirected to the studio at that time as a film that had not yet passed WP:NFF by getting released -- but since then it's apparently been cancelled outright and will never be released at all, meaning it retains no permanent notability anymore, and thus is no longer named in the studio's article either. Bearcat (talk) 15:18, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. Not mentioned at target. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 16:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Keep and Retarget to List of unproduced DreamWorks Animation projects. Where THERE IS an entry (Monkeys of Mumbai but this alternative title is mentioned). This cancelled film is very notable and the assertion that it's apparently been cancelled outright and will never be released at all, meaning it retains no permanent notability anymore is simply not true (because there are many many very very notable cancelled films), most specially for a redirect.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A cancelled film has to meet an extremely high bar to permanently retain notability, and cannot do it on just three or four pieces of "before it was cancelled" coverage. Bearcat (talk) 04:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still, your assertion is not true. And Den of Geek 2017 is coverage after cancellation, just like this.this this No further comment. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:15, 10 September 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).

Londonist[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! 10:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

There is no (longer) any connection between the Globalist franchise and londonist.com which should ideally have its own page. Proposal is to remove the redirect and let the community create a proper page for Londonist. Csmale (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Londonist has never pointed to Globalist; it's current longtime target is Gothamist, which I assume is what the nom intended. It's mentioned there so unsure about WP:REDYES makes a lot of sense. Anyone is able to make a new article either directly in the redirect or via WP:AFC. I can't easily find a better redirect target. Skynxnex (talk) 13:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - corrected the nomination header, as this page has always been a redirect to Gothamist and has never targeted Globalist, as Skynxnex observes above. I assume the nominator just made a mistake. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - current target contains all of the information we currently have on this webmagazine. If someone wants to draft an article I suggest doing so at Draft:Londonist and submitting through WP:AFC, as I'm not sure the topic would be separately notable. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:12, 8 September 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).

Laluk,Assam, India[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete as a broken redirect. ✗plicit 13:56, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created redirect (leftover from a move) with a spacing error in title. Initially tagged as WP:R3 but did not qualify as such. CycloneYoris talk! 09:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete: WP:G8 as its target has been deleted. I have tagged it as such. TartarTorte 13:54, 8 September 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).

The ROC[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 Roc. WP:SNOWBALL. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:19, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should either be redirect to Roc or Taiwan. Readers who type this to mean either Republic of China (Taiwan) or anything else with that abbrev are currently redirected to the article of the record label. Currently added hatnote on target as band-aid.-TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 06:42, 8 September 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).

Martina Princess[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 02:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that in the episode this is mentioning, Holidays of Future Passed, the name Lisa says is "Marcia Princess" [2]. There are so few hits for this redirect's name in Google (8 for me when requiring Simpsons as well) and no page views in the last 30 days, it's better to delete to help avoid risk of WP:CITOGENESIS. Skynxnex (talk) 01:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment (by nom) due to a question, I have watched the segment in question on Disney+ and to my ears it's "Marcia Princess" and the D+ provided subtitles agree. Skynxnex (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:22, 8 September 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).

Alisha Weir (Actress)[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 23:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The word "actress" in the parenthetical is capitalized, which is against Wikipedia style. Also, as a quick search reveals, there is no one else mentioned on English Wikipedia called "Alisha Weir", so the disambiguator is unnecessary. I recommend deletion. Duckmather (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2023 (UTC)struck 18:51, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}-even with it, it's potentially helpful. People might also hold the ⇧ Shift key for too long-I'm not sure how the capitalization is hurting things here. Regards, SONIC678 05:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RDAB because of the capital letter. I would be fine with Alisha Weir (actress) though, since redirects are cheap. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 11:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the duplicate article was revision deleted as a copyvio leaving only a stub so there doesn't appear to be any useful history. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @CopperyMarrow15 and Crouch, Swale: Oddly enough, I had thought to withdraw my own nomination per WP:CHEAP after Sonic678 !voted to keep until you !voted as well. I'll strike out my initial nomination statement anyhow. Furthermore, Alisha Weir (actress) does exist as a redirect anyways. Duckmather (talk) 18:50, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Coppery. Jay 💬 06:37, 15 September 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).

Ellen Suzanne Howell (Q19721605)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Speedy delete by David Eppstein via G7. (non-admin closure) Skynxnex (talk) 01:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per numerous past discussions such as Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 21#Wikidata redirects, redirects with Wikidata identifiers are not useful. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:14, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was just a copy-and-paste error. I must have intended the name without the QID, which was properly redirected later. Anyway I've deleted this under G7 (could also have been G6) so you can close this request. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:19, 8 September 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).

Amérique du Nord[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 North America. ✗plicit 02:36, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Soft redirects to non-English language editions of Wikipedia should be avoided because they are generally unhelpful to English-language readers. Instead, editors should link to the alternate language Wikipedia directly with one of various forms of interlanguage links." * Pppery * it has begun... 01:08, 8 September 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_September_8&oldid=1177826066"