stringtranslate.com

Wikipedia:Redirecciones para discusión

Redirecciones para discusión ( RfD ) es el lugar donde se discuten las redirecciones potencialmente problemáticas . Los elementos suelen permanecer en la lista durante una semana aproximadamente, después de lo cual se eliminan, se conservan o se redirigen.

No cambie unilateralmente el nombre ni el destino de una redirección mientras se está discutiendo. Esto agrega complicaciones innecesarias a la discusión para los participantes y los que cierran el tema.

Antes de incluir una redirección para su discusión

Tenga en cuenta estas políticas generales, que se aplican aquí y en otros lugares:

Los principios rectores de la RfD

Atajo
  • Guía WP:R

¿Cuándo debemos eliminar una redirección?


Atajos
  • WP:RFD#DAÑINO
  • ¿Qué es RFD?

Las principales razones por las que la eliminación de redirecciones es perjudicial son:

  • una redirección puede contener un historial de edición no trivial;
  • Si una redirección es razonablemente antigua (o es el resultado de mover una página que ha estado allí durante bastante tiempo), entonces es posible que su eliminación rompa los enlaces entrantes (tales enlaces que provienen de revisiones anteriores de páginas de Wikipedia, de resúmenes de ediciones, de otros proyectos de Wikimedia o de otros lugares de Internet , no aparecen en "Lo que enlaza aquí" ).

Por lo tanto, considere eliminar únicamente las redirecciones dañinas o las recientes.

Razones para eliminar

Atajo
  • WP:RFD#BORRAR

Es posible que desee eliminar una redirección si se cumple una o más de las siguientes condiciones ( pero tenga en cuenta también las excepciones que se enumeran debajo de esta lista ):

  1. La página de redireccionamiento dificulta excesivamente a los usuarios la búsqueda de artículos con nombres similares a través del motor de búsqueda. Por ejemplo, si el usuario busca "Artículos nuevos" y es redirigido a una página de desambiguación para "Artículos", tardará mucho más tiempo en llegar a los artículos recién añadidos en Wikipedia.
  2. La redirección podría causar confusión. Por ejemplo, si "Adam B. Smith" fue redirigido a "Andrew B. Smith", porque Andrew fue llamado Adam por accidente en una fuente, esto podría causar confusión con el artículo sobre Adam Smith , por lo que la redirección debería eliminarse.
  3. La redirección es ofensiva o abusiva, como por ejemplo redirigir "Joe Bloggs es un perdedor" a "Joe Bloggs" (a menos que "Joe Bloggs es un perdedor" se mencione legítimamente en el artículo), o "Joe Bloggs" a "Perdedor". ( Pueden aplicarse los criterios de eliminación rápida G10 y G3 ). Véase también § Neutralidad de las redirecciones.
  4. La redirección constituye autopromoción o spam. ( Puede aplicarse el criterio de eliminación rápida G11 ).
  5. La redirección no tiene sentido, por ejemplo, redirigir "Apple" a "Orange". ( Puede aplicarse el criterio de eliminación rápida G1 ).
  6. Se trata de una redirección entre espacios de nombres que sale del espacio de artículos, como una que apunta al espacio de nombres User o Wikipedia. La principal excepción a esta regla son las redirecciones de acceso directo a pseudoespacios de nombres , que técnicamente están en el espacio de artículos principal. Algunas redirecciones entre espacios de nombres de larga data también se mantienen debido a su larga historia y su posible utilidad. Las redirecciones " MOS: ", por ejemplo, fueron una excepción a esta regla hasta que se convirtieron en su propio espacio de nombres en 2024. (Tenga en cuenta también la existencia de alias de espacios de nombres como WP: . El criterio de eliminación rápida R2 puede aplicarse si el espacio de nombres de destino es algo distinto de Category: , Template: , Wikipedia: , Help: o Portal: ).
  7. Si la redirección está rota, es decir, redirige a un artículo que no existe, se puede eliminar inmediatamente según el criterio de eliminación rápida G8 . Debe comprobar que no haya otro lugar al que se pueda redirigir adecuadamente en primer lugar y que no se haya dañado por vandalismo.
  8. Si la redirección es un sinónimo nuevo o muy poco conocido de un nombre de artículo que no se menciona en el destino, es poco probable que sea útil. En particular, las redirecciones en un idioma distinto del inglés a una página cuyo tema no esté relacionado con ese idioma (o una cultura que hable ese idioma) generalmente no deben crearse. (Los errores tipográficos o los nombres incorrectos inverosímiles son candidatos para el criterio de eliminación rápida R3 , si se crearon recientemente).
  9. Si el artículo de destino debe ser movido al título de redirección, pero la redirección ha sido editada antes y tiene su propio historial, entonces el título debe ser liberado para dejar lugar para el movimiento. Si el movimiento no es controversial, etiquete la redirección para eliminación rápida de G6 , o alternativamente (con el suppressredirectderecho del usuario; disponible para los que mueven páginas y los administradores), realice un movimiento por turnos . Si no, lleve el artículo a Movimientos solicitados .
  10. Atajo
    • WP:RETORNADO
    Si la redirección pudiera ampliarse de manera plausible a un artículo, y el artículo de destino prácticamente no contiene información sobre el tema.

Razones para no eliminar

Atajo
  • WP:RFD#MANTENER

Sin embargo, evite eliminar dichas redirecciones si:

  1. Tienen un historial de páginas potencialmente útil, o un historial de edición que se debe mantener para cumplir con los requisitos de licencia para una fusión (ver Wikipedia:Fusionar y eliminar ). Por otro lado, si la redirección se creó al cambiar el nombre de una página con ese nombre, y el historial de la página solo menciona el cambio de nombre, y por una de las razones anteriores desea eliminar la página, copie el historial de la página a la página de Discusión del artículo al que redirige. El acto de cambiar el nombre es un historial de páginas útil, y más aún si ha habido una discusión sobre el nombre de la página.
  2. Estos enlaces facilitarían la creación de enlaces accidentales y harían menos probable la creación de artículos duplicados , ya sea redirigiendo un plural a un singular, redirigiendo un error ortográfico frecuente a uno correcto, redirigiendo un nombre erróneo a un término correcto, redirigiendo a un sinónimo, etc. En otras palabras, los redireccionamientos sin enlaces entrantes no son candidatos para la eliminación por esos motivos porque son beneficiosos para el usuario que navega. Se requerirá una vigilancia adicional por parte de los editores para minimizar la aparición de esos errores ortográficos frecuentes en el texto del artículo porque los errores ortográficos enlazados no aparecerán como enlaces rotos; considere etiquetar el redireccionamiento con la plantilla {{ R from misspelling }} para ayudar a los editores a monitorear estos errores ortográficos.
  3. Facilitan las búsquedas de determinados términos. Por ejemplo, los usuarios que vean que se menciona " Keystone State " en algún lugar pero no sepan a qué se refiere, podrán averiguarlo en el artículo sobre Pensilvania (objetivo).
  4. Eliminar redirecciones conlleva el riesgo de romper enlaces entrantes o internos. Por ejemplo, las redirecciones resultantes de cambios de página normalmente no deberían eliminarse sin una buena razón. Los enlaces que han existido durante un tiempo significativo, incluidos los enlaces CamelCase (por ejemplo, WolVes ) y los enlaces de subpáginas antiguas , deberían dejarse intactos en caso de que existan enlaces en páginas externas que apunten a ellos. Véase también Wikipedia:Rotura de enlaces § Rotura de enlaces en sitios que no son de Wikimedia .
  5. Alguien los encuentra útiles. Sugerencia: si alguien dice que le resulta útil una redirección, probablemente sea así. Es posible que a usted no le resulte útil, no porque la otra persona esté mintiendo, sino porque navega por Wikipedia de diferentes maneras. La evidencia del uso se puede medir utilizando la herramienta Wikishark o PageViews en la redirección para ver la cantidad de visitas que recibe.
  6. La redirección se realiza a una forma de palabra estrechamente relacionada, como una forma plural a una forma singular .

Neutralidad de las redirecciones

Atajo
  • WP:RNEUTRAL

Así como los títulos de artículos que utilizan un lenguaje no neutral están permitidos en algunas circunstancias , también lo están dichas redirecciones. Debido a que las redirecciones son menos visibles para los lectores, se permite más libertad en sus nombres, por lo tanto, la falta percibida de neutralidad en los nombres de las redirecciones no es una razón suficiente para su eliminación. En la mayoría de los casos, las redirecciones no neutrales pero verificables deben apuntar a artículos con títulos neutrales sobre el tema del término. Las redirecciones no neutrales pueden estar etiquetadas con .{{R from non-neutral name}}

Las redirecciones no neutrales se crean comúnmente por tres razones:

  1. Los artículos que se crean utilizando títulos no neutrales se mueven rutinariamente a un nuevo título neutral, lo que deja atrás el antiguo título no neutral como una redirección funcional (por ejemplo, Climategate → Controversia por correo electrónico de la Unidad de Investigación Climática ).
  2. Los artículos creados como bifurcaciones de POV pueden eliminarse y reemplazarse por una redirección que apunte al artículo del cual se originó la bifurcación (por ejemplo, rumor musulmán de Barack Obama → eliminado y ahora redirigido a teorías conspirativas sobre la religión de Barack Obama ).
  3. El tema de los artículos puede estar representado por algunas fuentes externas a Wikipedia en términos no neutrales. Dichos términos generalmente se evitan en los títulos de los artículos de Wikipedia, de acuerdo con las pautas de palabras que se deben evitar y la política general de punto de vista neutral . Por ejemplo, la expresión no neutral " Attorneygate " se utiliza para redirigir al artículo de título neutral Dismissal of US attorneys controversial . El artículo en cuestión nunca ha utilizado ese título, pero la redirección se creó para proporcionar un medio alternativo para llegar a él porque varios informes de prensa utilizan el término.

Las excepciones a esta regla serían las redirecciones que no son términos establecidos y que es poco probable que sean útiles, y por lo tanto pueden ser nominadas para su eliminación, tal vez bajo la razón de eliminación n.° 3. Sin embargo, si una redirección representa un término establecido que se utiliza en múltiples fuentes confiables , se debe mantener incluso si no es neutral, ya que facilitará las búsquedas de dichos términos. Tenga en cuenta que RfD no es el lugar para resolver la mayoría de las disputas editoriales.

Notas de cierre

Detalles en Instrucciones del administrador para RfD

Las nominaciones deben permanecer abiertas, según la política , aproximadamente una semana antes de que se cierren, a menos que cumplan con los criterios generales para la eliminación rápida , los criterios para la eliminación rápida de una redirección o no sean solicitudes de discusión de redirección válidas (por ejemplo, en realidad son solicitudes de movimiento ).

Cómo incluir una redirección para su discusión

Atajo
  • WP:RFDCOMO

Lista actual

Atajos
  • WP:RFD#ACTUAL
  • Página de inicio: RFDCD
  • Página de inicio: RFDCL

16 de octubre

Wikipedia:VB

Una redirección de acceso directo desde el espacio de nombres de Wikipedia a una plantilla de navegación no tiene mucho sentido. Probablemente debería redirigirse a Wikipedia:WikiProject Volleyball . ✗ plicit 14:49, 8 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la publicación:¿Eliminar o reorientar?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 20:15, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Estreñimiento

Término no mencionado ni definido en el objetivo. Aunque es similar a "Estreñimiento", parece ser una afección completamente diferente y más grave. ¡ Habla CycloneYoris ! 09:58, 8 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Tras una rápida búsqueda, no he encontrado un objetivo lo suficientemente bueno para eso, aparte de tal vez una obstrucción intestinal (donde tampoco se menciona). ¿Funcionaría por ahora una redirección suave a wikt:obstipation? cogsan (me regañan) (me acechan) 13:52, 8 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Una nota rápida: este término, "estreñimiento", es muy, muy raro en comparación con la obstrucción intestinal aguda (que parece ser el término equivalente "moderno", pero esa es solo mi impresión y no una fuente confiable).
Las definiciones del diccionario daban algo así como "estreñimiento grave + agudo", e incluso parecía una emergencia médica. Por lo tanto, basándome en esas definiciones del diccionario, cambié el enlace de defecación obstruida , que en mi opinión era inapropiado (esta última es una afección crónica, no una emergencia médica) y además no tenía fuentes. Moribundum ( discusión ) 18:10 8 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a incluir para generar un debate más exhaustivo y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Saludos, SONIC 678 19:48, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Batalla de la ciudad 17

Posible WP:Fancruft aunque técnicamente no está mal TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 18:26 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿A alguien le importaría agrupar La Batalla de la Ciudad 17 y La Batalla por la Ciudad 17 ? TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 18:29 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Aeropuerto de Shamrock

Se dirige a un artículo de clase lista que no contiene información específica sobre el tema. El tema en sí parece no estar a la altura de WP:GNG y WP:NBUILD debido a la falta de cobertura en las fuentes de WP:SECONDARY, excluyendo las menciones de WP:ROTM en bases de datos gubernamentales y de navegación relacionadas con la aviación, por lo que es poco probable que la redirección justifique alguna vez su reemplazo por un artículo completo. Carguychris ( discusión ) 19:17 30 sep 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la publicación:¿Mantener o reorientar?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 04:59, 8 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, Rosguill talk 15:54, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Wikipedia: WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur

Como hablé con TechnoSquirrel69 , ¿esto podría ser problemático ? Web-julio ( discusión ) 02:54 8 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

refinar la segunda lista de pokémon gen 1#meowth , encontrar una manera de encontrar redirecciones y encontrar el resto para los existentes (opcional) cogsan (regañame) (acechame) 11:39, 10 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, Rosguill talk 15:54, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Ataques de 2001

Estas redirecciones presuponen que el 11 de septiembre es el único ataque terrorista que ocurrió en 2001, lo cual es falso. Sugiero que se redirija a la Lista de incidentes terroristas de 2001. En cuanto a los ataques de 2001 , probablemente RC, IR pueda eliminarlos por completo, ya que se realizaron hace menos de un año. SeaHaircutSoilReplace ( discusión ) 23:35 7 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Redireccionamiento según lo indicado anteriormente. Hubo algunas redirecciones similares a principios de este año, pero no recuerdo cuáles. PARAKANYAA ( discusión ) 19:37 8 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, Rosguill talk 15:52, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Aeropuerto de Hall

He publicado el artículo sobre este aeropuerto en el que se basa que no cumple con los requisitos de WP:GNG y WP:NBUILD debido a la falta de cobertura en las fuentes de WP:SECONDARY, excluyendo las menciones de WP:ROTM en las bases de datos de navegación y gubernamentales relacionadas con la aviación. Otro usuario hizo un esfuerzo de buena fe para preservar el contenido fusionándolo con el artículo de Kaufman, Texas , pero el usuario no se dio cuenta de que el aeropuerto ha sido eliminado de los registros de la FAA porque presumiblemente ha cerrado de forma permanente (lo que, en retrospectiva, debería haber mencionado en la nominación de PROD). Por lo tanto, el artículo del aeropuerto ha sido reemplazado por una redirección que apunta a un artículo sobre una ciudad, pero el contenido que habla del aeropuerto presumiblemente debería eliminarse del artículo de destino por las mismas razones que describo anteriormente. Sugiero que tanto el contenido como la redirección deberían eliminarse. Carguychris ( discusión ) 21:57, 7 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, Rosguill talk 15:51, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Personajes no mencionados de Suikoden

Ninguno de estos se menciona en el objetivo. *Pppery* ha comenzado... 00:36, 25 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿No se aplicaría aquí la misma lógica que establece que las redirecciones de personajes individuales no destacables de Fire Emblem (como Matthew )? Esto me parece un poco indiscriminado. cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 20:19, 26 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 03:55, 2 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, Rosguill talk 15:44, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Laila Bonita

No se menciona esto ni ninguna otra portada indonesia (según el resumen de la edición) en el artículo. Xeroctic ( discusión ) 15:23 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

gitano

Actualmente, está dirigido a la población romaní . Término controvertido, considerado un insulto por un grupo considerable de personas. Nombres de la población romaní #Gypsy y gitano sería un mejor objetivo, que analiza mejor los términos. También hay una desambiguación: Gypsy (desambiguación) . Bug Ghost 🦗👻 12:01, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

  • No hay ningún artículo sobre el insulto en sí, pero los romaníes lo mencionan en la introducción y lo comentan con cierta extensión. Clarityfiend ( discusión ) 12:28 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Sería muy útil un artículo que analizara el término. Si alguien quiere empezar a escribir un artículo de este tipo, estaría dispuesto a ayudar y podría publicarlo en Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias . Yuchitown ( talk ) 16:06 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Notaré que citar WP:NOTCENSORED en este caso se encuentra con problemas de WP:UPPERCASE , vea WP:UPPERCASE#WP:NOTCENSORED . El ensayo correcto para citar aquí es en cambio WP:RNEUTRAL como lo tengo a continuación. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 14:41 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Mantén todo como se indica en WP:RNEUTRAL . Una vez más, explicaré por qué mantenemos las redirecciones de insultos como estas en dos partes, aunque incluiré una tercera parte.
  • Como se indica en WP:RNEUTRAL , las redirecciones tienen mucho más margen de maniobra que el resto de la enciclopedia en lo que respecta a la neutralidad, porque son casi invisibles, excepto cuando se utilizan activamente (o se mencionan en notas de sombrero/texto en negrita, como en WP:RASTONISH ). Nadie va a empezar en Romani people y terminar en Gypsy debido a la redirección en sí , a menos que se esfuercen por comprobar la página Special:WhatLinksHere/Romani_people .
  • Las redirecciones no neutrales también sirven como una herramienta de enseñanza importante. Digamos que un usuario vio El jorobado de Notre Dame (película de 1996) , que tiene una gran presencia del pueblo romaní en la trama, pero utiliza constantemente la palabra gitano para referirse a ellos y no tiene prácticamente ninguna otra información sobre ellos. El usuario va a Wikipedia y escribe gitano en la barra de búsqueda. ¿No le vendría bien que lo llevaran al artículo sobre el pueblo romaní y le enseñaran que el término correcto y neutral para referirse a ellos es romaní?
  • Y, por último, en el caso de estas redirecciones en particular, es probable que la gente no busque gitano para encontrar una discusión sobre el término en sí, sino que busque gitano para encontrar una discusión sobre los romaníes. Por lo tanto, el párrafo de apertura de Romani_people , que ya habla del término gitano y de cómo es un exónimo que se considera un insulto, es más que suficiente para evitar WP:RASTONISH y abordar el punto 2 anterior. Como mínimo, puede que se justifique un enlace más accesible en algún lugar de ese párrafo que apunte a Nombres del pueblo romaní#Gypsy y gipsy ; sin embargo, el objetivo actual de la redirección definitivamente va al lugar correcto.
𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 13:03 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
El objetivo de las redirecciones es beneficiar a los lectores. Si buscan información sobre personas romaníes a las que todavía se les suele llamar gitanos, la encontrarán. Si buscan información sobre el término en sí, esa información se proporciona allí. Gyp (jerga) es una redirección con historia, por lo que una redirección a Wikcionario podría ser mejor. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 17:53, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Jamie Jungers

No se menciona en el objetivo. (Como se muestra a continuación, las redirecciones de personas parecen un poco más urgentes que la mayoría de las redirecciones a un artículo sin mención ). jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 01:42, 9 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Buscando otras menciones en Wikipedia: el artículo del índice del conjunto Jungers dice que es una mujer asociada con Tiger Woods , y se la describe tangencialmente como una de las supuestas amantes de Tiger Woods en Be-Shure § Notes and Dog's Most Wanted § ep6 . Be-Shure solo cita guías de televisión para esa afirmación, y la otra no está citada. Dado que no hay un buen objetivo en otro lugar, creo que la redirección debería eliminarse a menos que se agregue una mención que satisfaga WP:BLP a Tiger Woods . jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 04:18, 9 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 09:20, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Borrar redirección que viola la ley BLP y que no tiene mucho sentido. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 17:55 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Srishti

No se menciona en el objetivo (no ahora, y no cuando se agregó una nota de sombrero ). Mirando Special:PrefixIndex/Srishti , hay un nombre ( Srishti Kaur , Srishti Rana , Srishti Jain ), Srishti (film) , Srishti Manipal Institute of Art, Design and Technology , y las coincidencias parciales de los títulos de Srishti Madurai y Srishtidnyan . Mirando las visitas a la página, no estoy seguro de si el nombre es el tema principal o si no hay un tema principal ; creo que podría depender de si los otros usos se derivan todos del nombre. También ayudaría si tuviera alguna idea de por qué se redirigió a unidades de tiempo hindúes ; le haré ping a Vinay Jha en caso de que lo recuerden. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 02:11, 9 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris Talk! 09:18, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Japeto

No hay ninguna razón aparente por la que esta ortografía no tenga el mismo tema principal que Iapetus . Me atrevería a redirigir el mensaje, pero ha sido una redirección a la luna durante 18 años con una nota de sombrero; parece que vale la pena discutirlo primero. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 07:00, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Sustituido

Incluso con mi sesgo hacia la química, siento que esto es demasiado amplio para redirigirlo a su objetivo actual. Si el uso de la química es realmente primario, probablemente sustituyente sería un mejor objetivo. Redirigir a sustituto , redirigir suavemente a Wikcionario o eliminarlo pueden ser mejores opciones. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 02:03, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿Hacia dónde se dirige el retarget? Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 03:22 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Β-aminoetilamina

Esta redirección del bot no tiene sentido, reemplaza fenilo por amino. Elimínelo para evitar confusiones. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 01:38, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Sí, pero supongo que sería simplemente aminoetilamina o α-aminoetilamina, que no se utilizan, mientras que β-aminoetilamina simplemente no tiene sentido. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 06:08 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
No estoy seguro de cuál es la convención para el alfa en las aminas, si se refiere al carbono con la amina en sí o al carbono siguiente. Basándonos en la β-metilfenetilamina como precedente de denominación, ¿no sería la α-aminoetilamina 1,1-diaminoetano (Etano-1,1-diamina (Q82220114) no parece lo suficientemente notable como para merecer un artículo), mientras que la β-aminoetilamina sería 1,2-diaminoetano (nuestro artículo sobre etilendiamina )? DMacks ( discusión ) 15:00, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Bien, la nomenclatura parece ser diferente. No creo que se justifique volver a utilizar etilendiamina. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 17:59 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Wikipedia:PCR

¿Qué piensan los editores sobre un redireccionamiento a Wikipedia:Revisión de cambios pendientes ? En mi experiencia, he visto a menudo que se utiliza esta sigla para referirse al grupo de usuarios revisores de cambios pendientes , y absolutamente nunca para esta sección de ensayo. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( suspiro ) 01:02, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se usa mucho en el espacio principal, pero creo que todo se hace a través de {{ context inline }} . Sería fácil no usar este atajo en esa plantilla. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 01:31, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Glenn Trumpkin

La nominación para Wikipedia:Redirecciones para discusión/Registro/15 de octubre de 2024 #Rapey McForehead me llevó a examinar las redirecciones pasadas de Jasonbres  ( discusión  · contribuciones ), que tiene una página de discusión de una milla de advertencias (incluida la redirección inexplicable del personaje de Donald Faison, Christopher Turk en Scrubs a Black Scrubs ) y un bloqueo pasado en su historial, y estos son los más inapropiados y provocativos de todos ellos, es poco probable que se utilicen, y después de que Traumnovelle  ( discusión  · contribuciones ) les preguntara por qué siquiera imaginarían crear una rd tan provocativa, respondió "Creo que en ese momento, era tendencia en Twitter, y creé una redirección para las personas que querían saber a quién se refería ese nombre", que para los primeros tres, no considero que los temas de tendencia de Twitter posteriores al sumidero sean una fuente de nada, mucho menos material de redireccionamiento. El último es simplemente una tontería, pero los tres primeros son innegables violaciones de WP:BLP , mientras que la referencia a la computadora portátil es solo para personas que están en línea sin parar (en relación con un contrapunto de "marca azul" a esto ). Nate • ( charla ) 00:58, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Glen Trumpkin se utiliza en RS: [2] [3] y, aunque no es un nombre neutral, no creo que sea una violación de la BLP, aunque la falta de visitas sugiere que esta redirección no es útil y no vale la pena la falta de neutralidad. No es como si estos artículos no estuvieran utilizando su nombre completo.
'Amy Covid Barnett' es una clara violación del BLP, el único resultado de búsqueda que obtengo es un foro lleno de comentarios ofensivos sobre Barnett.
Aquí se utiliza 'Leningrad Lindsey': [4] y tiene 53 páginas vistas, por lo que podría ser una redirección no neutral aceptable, aunque el RS identifica claramente su nombre completo.
Los dos últimos son términos de búsqueda muy poco probables, como lo demuestran sus 6 visitas en el último año.
Borra todo excepto Leningrad Lindsey, donde soy neutral en cuanto a mantenerlo por ahora. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 01:12 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Borra los tres primeros por ser chistes inverosímiles (ni siquiera vale la pena llamarlos juegos de palabras) y por no ser redirecciones de ataque lo suficientemente notables (incluso si hay fuentes, también mencionarán sus nombres reales, por lo que no tiene sentido), el cuarto por "solo encontré comentarios diversos en reddit", y mantén el quinto como una ortografía fonética lo suficientemente plausible. No me sorprendería si los primeros tres también fueran elegibles para g10
¿"Pero su computadora portátil" es el equivalente político de "Pero la rata, me robó mis documentos" ? cogsan (me regaña) (me acecha) 12:11 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Eliminar todo . De todos modos, ninguno de ellos parece un término de búsqueda plausible. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 18:32 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Beta-etilfenetilamina

Esto indica un compuesto diferente al objetivo (uno con un átomo de carbono adicional, etilo en lugar de metilo ), uno para el cual enwiki no parece tener ningún contenido (ver C10H15N , en comparación con el objetivo C9H13N ). Borrar. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 00:48 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Raad 1

Cuanto más investigo sobre esta redirección, más confuso me siento. Para empezar, esta redirección anteriormente apuntaba al artículo que se encuentra actualmente en Fajr-3 (cohete de artillería) , y lo hizo durante los últimos seis años. Sin embargo, antes de eso, esta redirección apuntaba al artículo al que apunta actualmente. Sin embargo, para generar un poco más de confusión, existe otro artículo con un título similar, Raad-1 . Es posible que ya haya descubierto un mejor plan para qué hacer con esta redirección si no fuera por sus enlaces entrantes; no tengo claro a qué tema se refieren estos enlaces. Creo que desambiguar es el camino a seguir aquí, pero no tengo muy claro cuál debería ser el título base para una página de desambiguación de este tipo. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 00:41, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

15 de octubre

Centros de educación y formación profesional

La definición de centros de formación y educación vocacional es muy vaga y lo primero que me viene a la cabeza no es China. Dr vulpes (discusión) 04:59 1 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Para mí, lo más lógico es reorientar el programa a una escuela vocacional . Dr vulpes (discusión) 22:08 1 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la nueva publicación:¿Reorientar o conservar?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 05:06, 8 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Manténgase al día con la nota de sombrero según Shhhnotsoloud y feminista. Si bien el nombre real de estos campamentos es "Centros de educación y capacitación vocacional", lo que significa que probablemente este sea el tema principal, este puede ser un lugar bastante WP:ASTONISHing para terminar si no sabía sobre ellos. Afortunadamente, Wikipedia tiene una herramienta útil para esta situación:
"Centros de educación y capacitación vocacional" redirige aquí. Para la institución que dicen ser estos campamentos, consulte Escuela vocacional .
Tal vez dé una segunda pasada sobre cómo escribir esto realmente. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 02:07 9 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Sabes qué... Podría aceptarlo. El nombre me parece sorprendente, pero la nota en el sombrero debería ser suficiente. Cambio mi voto a Mantener con nota en el sombrero . Fieari ( discusión ) 23:30 9 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a poner en venta para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la nueva publicación:el consenso parece inclinarse por mantenerla.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 00:03, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Me opongo a que se mantenga en el objetivo actual. Hay muchos otros temas que utilizan el término y no veo evidencia de que este sea el tema principal para la redirección [5] [6] [7]
Además, @Lunamann , esa sugerencia de la nota de sombrero es una clara violación del punto de vista de la audiencia. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 00:08, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Por eso mencioné que podría ser una buena idea tener una segunda versión de cómo escribirlo. A menos que la violación del NPOV se deba simplemente a que tiene la nota en el sombrero en primer lugar, en lugar de la frase "... afirma ser...", en cuyo caso no sé cómo complacerte jajaja 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 13:09 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Wikipedia:CBOT

¿Podría referirse también a cluebot ng o cluebot 3 ? cogsan (me regañan) (me acechan) 22:08, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿Cómo se llama un egipcio?

No se menciona el fandub alemán en el objetivo. No encontré fuentes confiables para ello, por lo que un borrador no parece una decisión plausible. Originalmente era una producción que no llegó a ninguna parte, por lo que se criticó un año después, presumiblemente por no tener fuentes. cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 20:31, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar según WP:RLANG . 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 21:51 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
¿Por qué no redirigir al grupo Die Ärzte ? Se redirigió al artículo como una fusión, pero no sé si realmente se fusionó algo. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 04:10 16 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Probablemente no haya suficiente fuente. Tampoco se menciona allí, pero en su discografía cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:02, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Violador McForehead

Borrar Discusión cerrada , ver discusión completa . El resultado fue: Eliminación rápida según WP:CSD#G10 .

Lo siento, Dave, me temo que no puedo hacer eso.

Según Wikipedia:Redirecciones_para_discusión/Log/2024_April_19#Lo_siento_Dave . No estoy convencido de que la eliminación haya sido la solución correcta, pero esta redirección debería sufrir la misma suerte. *Pppery* ha comenzado... 18:08, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿Es realmente la cita más notable de toda la obra? ¡Realmente excelente! Este contenido podría mejorar la enciclopedia. ¿Debe haber alguna manera de verificar esta afirmación a partir de una fuente confiable? Si tuviera que escribir esto como una cita significativa, para empezar, sin duda querría leer sobre la cita ESPECÍFICAMENTE, porque ese es exactamente el término de búsqueda que escribí, pero ese artículo no existe en este momento. Por lo tanto, nos gustaría alentar a los lectores a agregar material que no tenemos, según WP:REDLINK . Para un artículo independiente, una estructura como ¡ Nuestra princesa está en otro castillo! podría funcionar. Definitivamente lo hemos hecho antes. Pero tal vez este tema de cita se pueda tratar en una página diferente y no tenga que ser independiente si las fuentes no están a la altura. Si tuviera que elegir un personaje para terminar, personalmente querría ir a un artículo sobre "Dave" (porque ese es el nombre que escribí a propósito). No escribí HAL 9000. Si hubiera querido HAL 9000, yo (y cualquiera que quisiera encontrar HAL 9000) habría escrito "HAL 9000", lo cual evito deliberadamente al escribir 9 palabras, ninguna de las cuales contiene "HAL" y ninguna de las cuales contiene "9000". El término de búsqueda es, para todos los tiempos y propósitos, un tema totalmente separado. Una cita. No un personaje. Y no existe nada para ello en Wikipedia, al parecer.
Si esta cita es tan importante como se afirma aquí, parece que sería un jonrón tener ALGO, en ALGÚN lugar, relacionado con esta cita. Pero, hasta donde yo sé, no lo tenemos, en ningún lado. No lo tuvimos en enero. No lo tuvimos en abril. Y casi un año después, tampoco en octubre. Así que la única conclusión que se puede sacar de la historia, dado que ni siquiera Lunamann quiso salvar esto en abril, es que esta cita no debe valer la pena. (Obviamente, esto no es cierto, porque la cita ES "importante" y probablemente notable, ¡posiblemente incluso alcance notoriedad independiente! Pero Wikipedia no está tratando de "corregir los errores" de una falta de cobertura. Solo podemos informar y redirigir en función del material que está contenido aquí en Wikipedia . No lo que queremos que contenga. Esto es independientemente de si es "importante", pero no se menciona todavía). La forma de indicar que hay un vacío en la cobertura de Wikipedia que debe llenarse es un enlace rojo. Esta redirección no tiene ningún historial valioso. SIEMPRE se puede recrear una vez que alguien sienta que es necesario discutir esta cita potencialmente notable en la enciclopedia en línea más grande. Lo que seguramente sucederá eventualmente, especialmente si la "cita es sinónimo del objetivo en sí". Pero no necesita suceder ahora. Estamos en WP:NORUSH para terminarlo. Y mientras tanto, las personas que buscan una cita y no terminan en material directamente relacionado con su término de búsqueda, seguramente serán engañadas, ya que Wikipedia no es, no funciona como, ni se anuncia como un servicio de "escriba una cita y obtenga el personaje que la dijo sin ninguna mención del término de búsqueda que usó porque no es lo suficientemente 'importante' como para ser cubierto en la página de destino en la que terminó". El contenido del artículo dicta las redirecciones que deberían existir. No al revés. Recree la redirección una vez que se agregue una mención con fuente, en algún lugar de Wikipedia, porque no hay ninguna en este momento... excepto una.
Alternativamente, redirija a Love and Rocket , donde se analiza la cita y se vincula fácilmente a HAL 9000. Pero supongo que la gente probablemente no querría eso. Bueno. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 00:29, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Trabajadores

Decisiones divididas o a medida Discusión cerrada , ver discusión completa . Resultado: cierre de procedimiento

Ley judía tradicional

Error ortográfico poco probable (la ortografía correcta también es una redirección) Naraht ( discusión ) 17:01 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Vulcano-Hércules

La redirección debe eliminarse a menos que se agregue información sobre Vulkan-Hercules a esa página y se indique su fuente. Como el objetivo de redirección existe hoy en día, se menciona un concepto de diseño futuro ( Vulkan ); pero no se menciona Vulkan-Hercules ni Hercules en ninguna parte del artículo. N2e ( discusión ) 16:29 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Shanker se quedó sin palabras

Originalmente creado como una redirección de spam de BLP para Shanker (ahora un apellido deshabilitado) como se ve aquí: [8]. No sirve como una redirección de spam. Gotitbro ( discusión ) 10:25 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

eliminar: ninguna página de desambiguación contiene a alguien llamado Shanker jadapa Ca ¡háblame!15:23 15 octubre 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Raffaella Aleotti (Q3929201)

Término de búsqueda inverosímil. El ID entre corchetes es el ID de un elemento de Wikidata. - MPGuy2824 ( discusión ) 09:35 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Heavy está muerto

Vídeo popular en las comunidades de TF2, pero no se menciona en el artículo. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 05:36 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar según WP:RETURNTORED . No hay información presente en el artículo; si alguien tiene información sobre esto, puede crear una página o sección al respecto en algún lugar. Hasta que eso suceda, no necesitamos esta redirección. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 06:09, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
matar por lunamann. no hay prejuicios contra la recreación heavy está muerto aquí cogsan (me regaña) (me acecha) 13:10, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Podcast sobre crímenes reales

¿Crímenes reales o podcasts ? La página de podcasts definitivamente no dice nada sobre crímenes reales. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 04:20 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Reorientación hacia Crímenes reales#Podcasts BugGhost 🦗👻 06:48, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Cable SHOUTcast

¿Qué tiene esto que ver específicamente con el podcasting en general? Cabe señalar que Shoutcast tiene su propia página. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 04:11 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Mongoloides americanos

Esto va a ser muy controvertido si se mantiene (en el objetivo actual). TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 04:05 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Paquete con la versión singular. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 14:20 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

En primer lugar

No creo que sea buena idea una redirección relacionada con el adverbio a una página que trata específicamente sobre el número. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 04:02 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Una vez (adverbio)

No creo que sea buena idea una redirección relacionada con el adverbio a una página que trata específicamente sobre el número. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 04:01 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar por el mismo motivo que el anterior . ¡háblame!15:36 15 octubre 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Linjian

El nombre, que es el de una ciudad de la provincia china de Shandong, se está redirigiendo al portavoz del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores de la República Popular China con el mismo nombre. O bien debería eliminarse o redirigirse a la página de destino que he indicado. Toadboy123 ( discusión ) 03:47 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Mongoloide americano

Si bien este término se ha utilizado históricamente para describir a los pueblos de las Primeras Naciones, es el equivalente a que la palabra n redirija a las personas de ascendencia africana. Incluso existe una versión en plural de esta redirección. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:46 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Si no tuviéramos un artículo sobre la palabra nigger, probablemente se redirigiría a "Afroamericano" como un nombre histórico y no neutral. De hecho, la edición más antigua que aún se puede consultar lo muestra como una redirección.
Si debería estar dirigido a los mongoloides es un tema diferente, pero no eliminamos términos históricos porque sean ofensivos. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 05:04 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Nunca dije que esto debería eliminarse, aunque probablemente debería haber mencionado que Mongoloid sería un mejor objetivo. Es un poco chocante ver que un término no neutral redirija a un grupo étnico entero cuando ya existe un mejor objetivo. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 05:15 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
@ Traumnovelle Espero sinceramente que no quieras decir lo que dijiste en tu primera oración. Sería una redirección absolutamente absurda, horrible y ridícula y sería un problema de WP:CIR pensar lo contrario. Piensa en las cosas antes de decirlas, especialmente en temas como los insultos raciales. BugGhost 🦗👻 14:46, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Gitano es un insulto y redirige a la gente romaní . Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 19:47 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
La solicitud de decisión para esto ahora está registrada aquí - Wikipedia:Redirecciones para discusión/Registro/16 de octubre de 2024#Gypsy Bug Ghost 🦗👻 12:10, 16 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Manténgalo como por WP:RNEUTRAL . Las redirecciones no necesitan ser neutrales, por dos razones. 1, no son visibles para la mayoría de los lectores a menos que las personas las busquen específicamente, casi nadie comenzará en Pueblos indígenas de las Américas y terminará en Mongoloid americano . 2, si alguien conoce el término no neutral pero no el término neutral, redirigirlo al término neutral lo lleva a la información solicitada, al mismo tiempo que le enseña al lector cuál es el término neutral. Notaré que lapalabra N y el insulto F tienen sus propias páginas con, en la primera oración de ambos , un enlace al grupo al que apunta cada insulto por turno, por lo que posiblemente no sean los mejores ejemplos que podría haber dado. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 06:03 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Esto me muestra cómo responder sin presionar actualizar después de tener la página abierta por un período prolongado, jajaja. Cambiar el voto a Retarget a Mongoloid ; aunque notaré que si el retarget falla, apoyo Keeping como una opción de respaldo. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 06:06, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Indios

¿Se supone que esto es jerga? Ni siquiera veo ningún uso real de la palabra y, al buscarla en Google, la mayoría de los resultados se relacionan con indios reales. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:38 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Sigue por Thryduulf. -1ctinus📝 🗨 18:58, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Sabiduría india

Probablemente sea una broma, pero definitivamente no es una redirección que valga la pena. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:35 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Pueblo norteamericano

Esta redirección es demasiado vaga como para referirse a los nativos de NA y mucho menos a todos los nativos de NA y SA. TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:32 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Contador: globalización global

Esto definitivamente entra en Wikipedia:Redirecciones en idiomas distintos del inglés . ¿Los rusos no podrían simplemente usar la traducción al ruso? TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:19 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar por RFOR Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 03:33 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Eliminar : a pesar de que muchos rusos juegan a este juego, no es útil en Wikipedia en inglés, ya que este juego no se creó en Rusia ni tiene vínculos con ese país. JuniperChill ( discusión ) 21:39 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

КСГО

Probablemente cuenta como Wikipedia:Redirecciones en idiomas distintos del inglés TeapotsOfDoom ( discusión ) 03:15 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar videojuego estadounidense que no menciona a Rusia ni al cirílico. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 03:16 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Aerolíneas KLM Ryl Dtch

Me cuesta ver la utilidad de esta redirección que abrevia ligeramente dos de las tres palabras del nombre completo de la aerolínea. Si el espacio es un bien escaso, seguramente usarías simplemente "KLM" o abreviarías también "Aerolíneas". Esto ahorra solo 3 caracteres. Al buscar "klm Ryl Dtch Airlines" -Wikipediaen Google, aparece exactamente un resultado, "cómo pronunciar", que extrae los títulos de las páginas de Wikipedia. Ha acumulado 77 resultados desde que la herramienta de visualización de páginas actual comenzó a realizar un seguimiento en julio de 2015, lo que (si mis cálculos no me fallan) es un promedio de 0,7 resultados por mes y desde el 1 de enero de 2023 ha acumulado solo 4 resultados. La capitalización es, con mucho, el punto menos importante aquí, pero para cualquier redirección en mayúsculas y minúsculas, esperaría que KLM estuviera completamente en mayúsculas. Por otro lado, esto es antiguo (creado en 2012) e inequívoco. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 02:52 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Comentario Creo que lo saqué de un documento que decía eso, pero lamentablemente no escribí ninguna nota sobre de dónde lo saqué. En algunas redirecciones más nuevas, incluyo URL/documentación para recordar por qué estoy redireccionando algunos términos. WhisperToMe ( discusión ) 03:02, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

"Escabullirse."

Estuve en este título durante aproximadamente un día en 2011 después de un movimiento erróneo desde el espacio de usuario. Según el "precedente" existente de títulos citados que figuran en Usuario:Uanfala/Redirecciones con comillas , ninguno parece contener puntuación innecesariamente. "Innecesario" parece ser el caso aquí, ya que la canción se llama simplemente Steal Away sin otras modificaciones. También sería ambiguo con Steal Away y los otros 5 artículos con este título (sorprendentemente, todavía no existe una desambiguación, solo una enorme nota de sombrero en Steal Away que enumera literalmente todo, supongo, jajaja. Haré una ahora mismo en Steal Away (desambiguación) ). Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 02:21, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿No soy un apestoso? (paquete restante)

"Stinker" no aparece en el artículo de destino de Bugs Bunny . Sin embargo, se menciona en The Abbott and Costello Show y en varios otros artículos, incluidos List of Saturday TV Funhouse segments y WikiQuote en q:Hare Force. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 01:50, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Bueno, se reduciría a "¿dónde recibirán los lectores la información más pertinente a su término de búsqueda y dónde se responderán sus preguntas?", y ese no es el caso de Bugs Bunny, que no tiene ninguna mención. Sin embargo, la frase "Ain't I a stinker" tiene como 6 menciones en Wikipedia, todas las cuales posiblemente sean válidas y podrían atraer al objetivo, pero los detalles finos se pueden determinar a través de esta RfD. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 02:22, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Esta frase no es relevante en la página de la serie de televisión Abbott y Costello, porque nunca se usó en la serie. Un mejor lugar podría ser en la página del programa de radio A&C o en la página de biografía de Abbott y Costello. Creo que es una frase menor que no se asoció fácilmente con el equipo. Plummer ( discusión )

"¿No soy un apestoso?"

RfD anteriores para esta redirección y redirecciones similares:

Ninguna otra página de la Categoría:Redirecciones desde frases clave está entrecomillada. La palabra "stinker" no aparece en la página de destino. Alguien que utiliza este término, CON las comillas, claramente está buscando algo específico para la frase. Si alguien quisiera leer sobre Bugs Bunny, puede buscar " Bugs Bunny ". Pero, al especificar las comillas, estamos tratando con una situación en la que la cita y el material relacionado son ESPECÍFICAMENTE deseados, y eso no es lo que los lectores obtendrán cuando escriban esto. Además, encapsular un término de búsqueda entre comillas es altamente desaconsejable en el sentido general para todas las redirecciones, y existe una pequeña fracción de tales títulos. Al buscar una coincidencia de texto exacta a través de la barra de búsqueda de Wikipedia, se pueden usar comillas para ver "con qué frecuencia aparece una frase en Wikipedia en su forma exacta". Las comillas en este título inhiben activamente eso, ya que "ain't I a stinker" es presumiblemente una frase que puede (y lo hace) manifestarse en todo tipo de formas en Wikipedia. Por lo tanto, esto debería eliminarse para facilitar la navegación. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 01:48, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Diamanteina

Supuestamente es un nombre coloquial para el compuesto según Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemicals/Archive_2007#Diamondina , pero no hay evidencia como tal en Google o Chemical Abstracts Service o PubChem . El artículo estuvo originalmente bajo este nombre por poco más de un día en 2007. Normalmente es un {{ R from move }} típico que debería mantenerse de alguna manera, pero si no hay absolutamente ninguna relación discernible con nada en enwiki, podría simplemente llevar a confusión. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 01:18, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Cuando el horizonte está abajo, es interesante. Cuando el horizonte está arriba, es interesante. Cuando el horizonte está en el medio, ¡es aburrido como la mierda!

Se trata de una cita de Ford a Sammy, supuestamente. Sin embargo, es un término de búsqueda poco probable y no es particularmente útil como redirección, entre los millones de citas que existen, y solo aparece dentro de un extracto de referencia. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 01:13, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

No hay fiesta como una fiesta de Diddy

No aparece en la lista de destino. Si se conserva, también tengo curiosidad por redirigir a las acusaciones de mala conducta sexual de Sean Combs , dado que la cita está relacionada con los medios populares. Significa liberdade (she/her) ( discusión ) 01:00, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Es hora de un duelo

No se menciona la "dd" en el artículo de destino. Según los RCAT, aparentemente se trata de una cita relacionada con un meme, pero no aparece en ningún lugar del artículo tal como está escrita. Las personas que busquen Yu-Gi-Oh! pueden llegar al tema escribiendo Yugioh . Poner guiones entre todas las d, solo para llegar a un tema de meme no discutido, no parece particularmente útil ni provechoso aquí. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 00:59, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿A quién exactamente le resulta útil? Personalmente, busco un meme esperando información sobre él. El 90 % de las personas familiarizadas con el meme saben que es de Yu-Gi-Oh (o al menos eso parece a partir de [9], donde se habla de él en KnowYourMeme). Como mínimo, los lectores esperan leer sobre lo que buscaron. Así que los lectores llegan aquí pensando: "¡Ah, entonces el meme se habla en esta página, genial!". Uno pasa los siguientes 50 mil bytes buscando y buscando y no, no hay contexto, no hay beneficio. No necesitamos una redirección para "es hora de batirse a duelo" si todo lo que va a implicar es "este término es sinónimo de todo el concepto del artículo de tema general de Yu-Gi-Oh!, sin ninguna sección específica o ancla implícita".
Los memes son novedosos. No me sorprende que la gente QUIERA aprender sobre ellos aquí, pero aún así no es útil como una redirección uno a uno, ya que actualmente deja a la gente perdida en una página sin ninguna información para su término de búsqueda de memes y sin mención de "meme" en Yu-Gi-Oh . Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 03:17, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Redirigido a Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters . Esto no es simplemente un meme: es una cita directa de la secuencia de apertura original del doblaje en inglés de este anime específico, y la mayoría de las memeificaciones de esta cita simplemente extienden la parte tartamudeante "dddddd", o juegan con ella y con los personajes del anime de Yu-Gi-Oh en general. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 06:17 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Entonces, es un meme. Conozco bien la secuencia de Yu-Gi-Oh en cuestión, y el meme asociado y sus derivaciones. Claramente no es una "cita directa", de lo contrario, este texto (guiones y todo) aparecería en la transcripción del episodio aquí: [10]. De todos modos, gracias por sugerir una opción más relacionada. Pero sigue siendo un meme no mencionado. ¿Cómo tiene esto alguna relación con la probabilidad de escribir ad, seguido de un guion, seguido de ad, seguido de un guion, seguido de ad, seguido de un guion, seguido de ad, seguido de un guion, seguido de ad, seguido de "uel"? ¿Y todo para terminar en un artículo de la serie donde no se menciona el meme que se busca, ni ninguna de las grafías de los memes? Incluso en el anime y el video al que te vinculaste, tartamudean como 9 veces, por lo que incluso ese aspecto no es preciso dentro de esta redirección, y nada de Es hora de batirse a duelo, Es hora de d-batir, Es hora de dd-batir, Es hora de ddd-batir, Es hora de dddd-batir (se nombra), Es hora de ddddd-batir, Es hora de dddddd-batir, Es hora de ddddddd-batir, Es hora de dddddddd-batir, Es hora de ddddddddd-batir existe, o Es hora de dduel, Es hora de dddduel, Es hora de dddduel, o Es hora de ddddduel para el caso. Los precedentes pasados ​​han indicado que los guiones aleatorios insertados en las palabras no son útiles, ofuscan los términos que realmente se dicen y hacen que las búsquedas sean poco prácticas. Y al menos en el caso de estas discusiones precedentes, se trataba de citas que aparecían en el objetivo, si mal no recuerdo (en un estado natural/sin modificar, creo). La cita dice oficialmente "es hora de batirse a duelo". Cualquier cosa que vaya más allá de eso, la convierte en un meme/versión de meme. Alguien que se compromete con la combinación de 5 ds/4 guiones está escribiendo deliberadamente un meme en el motor de búsqueda, por lo que, si se mantiene, el contenido debería reflejarlo. Ni la versión real ni ninguna de las variaciones de meme están cubiertas en el nuevo objetivo sugerido, y Wikipedia no es una colección de memes. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 16:34, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

33-4

Esto parece demasiado amplio para ser útil. Significa libertad (ella/su) ( discusión ) 00:57 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

La ironía de que la nominación de eliminación añada 334 bytes ... Uhm... Sí. Ya sabes... No sé por qué... [1] ABG ( Discusión/Reportar cualquier error aquí ) 01:10 15 oct 2024 (UTC) ABG ( Discusión/Reportar cualquier error aquí ) 01:10 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Referencias

  1. ^ https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=33-4&redirect=no
En Estados Unidos, casi nadie lo reconoce.
En la cultura de Internet japonesa/Japón mismo: Sí fuerte
(Aviso legal: el resultado "33-4" se dio en los 4 partidos diferentes, no en un solo partido). Jawiki tiene una cobertura clara y buena del meme de Internet asociado con la serie, pero nadie en enwiki hasta ahora reconoce este tipo de cosas. ABG ( Discusión/Reportar errores aquí ) 02:41 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Nunca confíes en un camarero con mala gramática

No se menciona "camarero" ni "gramática" en el artículo de destino. Las personas que utilicen este término de búsqueda serán enviadas al artículo en cuestión sin contexto sobre qué significa esta línea o de qué procede. (El resumen de la edición dice que es de Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast , pero incluso en ese artículo no se menciona "gramática", aunque se menciona a un camarero una vez en el reparto). Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 00:57 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

eliminar . no en el lado notable de los chistes de una sola línea, incluso del perforador de dragones kell residente y máquina de chistes de una sola línea kyle katarn cogsan (me regaña) (me acecha) 20:42, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿Cuántos de nosotros los tenemos?

La frase redirecciona a la canción Whodini como letra clave. La frase se indica en el artículo donde indica que Bone Thugs-n-Harmony sampleó la canción en su canción "Friends", que aparentemente ha sido retitulada "How Many of Us Have Them" en algún lanzamiento (según la página. Esa canción está en el álbum The Art of War (álbum de Bone Thugs-n-Harmony) . Además, "¿cuántos de nosotros los tenemos?" es un poema de Danez Smith . Significa liberdade (she/her) ( discusión ) 00:55, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Hice esto después de una búsqueda, elimínelo si es malo GeorgeMemulous ( discusión ) 01:32, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Cacao

Por WP:RFOR

También nominando a Kahakos , Kahakō , Tohutō y Pōtae . Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 00:54, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]

Los verdaderos G se mueven en silencio como lasaña

Esta es la letra número 29 del segundo verso. Y "lasaña" no se menciona en el artículo de destino. No parece ser necesario tener esto como redirección cuando la forma natural de llegar al título de un artículo enciclopédico es escribiendo el título de un artículo enciclopédico, porque para la mayoría de los lectores habituales, no hay forma de saber qué letra tiene y qué no tiene una redirección existente, por lo que la jugada más segura el 100% del tiempo es identificar el título de la canción y proceder en función de eso, no navegar a través de una línea en particular para una canción en particular, una hazaña que es imposible para esencialmente todos los demás artículos de canciones en Wikipedia (ya que no conozco muchas redirecciones de la línea 2 del verso 2 que existan hacia canciones). Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 00:26, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar el término de búsqueda de Wikipedia que no es plausible, como lo demuestran las pocas visitas a la página. Traumnovelle ( discusión ) 00:57 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Billy salvaje

Mantener Discusión cerrada , ver discusión completa . El resultado fue: mantener

Joe Tractorman

No se habla de un "Joe Tractorman" en el artículo de destino, incluso si quisiera cambiar su nombre y volar, supuestamente... Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 00:12 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Agregué esta redirección para ser tonto. Si quieres eliminarla, no dudes en hacerlo, pero no tienes que hacerlo. lol - TenorTwelve ( discusión ) 06:18 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
eliminar . no está a la altura de damien maymdien en la lista de personajes de bill wurtz con los que he visto a gente que quiere acostarse. quiero decir, ¿qué? cogsan (me regaña) (me acecha) 13:17, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Borra esto , no tiene sentido ni ayuda. -1ctinus📝 🗨 19:00, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

El sol es un láser mortal.

Sin utopos ( discusión / cont .) 00:09, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]

¡Ya no, hay una manta! Parece una de esas redirecciones graciosas. Cualquiera que conozca este meme suele saber sobre Bill Wurtz, así que... ¿término de búsqueda improbable? ABG ( Discusión/Reportar errores aquí ) 01:04 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Reorientar a la capa de ozono Refinar a Bill Wurtz#Historia del mundo entero, supongo , que es la sección que detalla el video del que proviene esta cita. Cualquiera que busque información sobre este meme haría bien en que se le indicara la parte del artículo de Bill Wurtz que habla sobre el origen del meme. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 06:23 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Vamos a la tierra . Refinación de soporte. La frase se menciona brevemente en RSes (ver [12]), por lo que al menos es una frase algo útil. —  Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧  ( discusión | contribuciones ) 08:31 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
aprende a usar un huevo refinado por lunamann, veré si se puede agregar una mención (aunque no tengo mucha fe en eso) cogsan (me regaña) (me acecha) 13:19, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Cuarzoso

Siento que esto debería apuntar al cuarzo como {{ R del adjetivo }} a menos que haya una buena razón geológica para apuntar al artículo más amplio sobre el dióxido de silicio . Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 00:01, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

De acuerdo, cuarzosa simplemente significa que contiene cuarzo o que es rico en cuarzo. Mikenorton ( discusión ) 14:02 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

14 de octubre

Obrero

No está claro si este es el mejor objetivo. Esta redirección ha apuntado a la página Trabajador , Clase trabajadora , Fuerza laboral y Trabajador (desambiguación) . Natg 19 ( discusión ) 23:57 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

@ Fgnievinski y Pppery : quienes han estado involucrados en esta redirección recientemente. Natg 19 ( discusión ) 23:58 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Mueva Worker (desambiguación) a Worker sobre la redirección. Debería haber un tema principal aquí, pero hemos elegido estructurar el artículo de tal manera que ese concepto se cubra en varios artículos en lugar de uno, por lo que la página de desambiguación es la solución menos mala. * Pppery * ha comenzado... 00:04, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Borrador: Cimexa

WP:XNR confuso del espacio de borradores. No hay ninguna página Cimexa o User:Cimexa y no hay evidencia de que alguna vez haya contenido relacionado con el objetivo actual. Eliminar a menos que haya una explicación. Mdewman6 ( discusión ) 23:44 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Cara de pizza

Actualmente no se menciona en el objetivo y el tema principal está completamente usurpado por un personaje de la torre de pizza con el mismo nombre (bien por él :3) . Estaba a punto de volver a apuntar allí y dar por terminado el día, pero según wikt:pizza face, podría haber otros posibles objetivos. ¿Opiniones? cogsan (regámeme) (acechame) 19:30, 7 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, ✗ plicit 23:43, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

AN/ALQ-128

El tema de esta redirección, el AN/ALQ-128, apenas se menciona en la página de destino sobre un avión, el McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle . El destino es una subsección que enumera múltiples especificaciones para el avión. El lector debe buscar muy a fondo para encontrar el ALQ-128 mencionado. Esta redirección no tiene ningún propósito real y debería eliminarse. — TadgStirkland 401 (Tadg Talk ) 21:26, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

En realidad, parece que este era un artículo hasta 2022, cuando fue nominado como PROD, pero luego fue desproducido y redirigido a su objetivo actual. Tal vez deberíamos anular el BLAR original y enviarlo a AFD. Natg 19 ( discusión ) 02:10 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
eliminar . no es que sea un experto en artilugios militares, pero la segunda y tercera fuentes en la diferencia previa a Blar no parecen tan confiables , significativas , no generadas por el usuario, no obsoletas por raspado y plagio ... honestamente, tampoco estoy poniendo demasiada fe en la primera (que actualmente está inactiva, ya que el archivo de Internet también está inactivo), ya que la redacción allí implica que se trata más del AN/ALR-56. Encontré un artículo aparentemente confiable que lo menciona, pero es de pasada, ni siquiera sobre el F-15, y parece que solo lo menciona por accidente (mezclándolo con el AN/ALQ-218, probablemente) cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 16:46, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Yo soy..., ¡Escúchame rugir!

No se menciona ningún punto suspensivo "..." antes de "escúchame rugir". El único uso de "escúchame rugir" está precedido por "soy mujer", no por nada ni puntos suspensivos. Esta no es la forma en que se buscaría esta canción. El único uso de una palabra de reemplazo es "Hombre", de Burger King. En cualquier caso, es poco probable. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:20 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

  • Borrar
- TadgStirkland 401 (Tadg Talk ) 01:10, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]

Ting ting tang tang tang

Esta no es la letra de la canción. Este nombre incorrecto no aparece, no se menciona ni se destaca en ninguna parte del artículo. La palabra "ting" o "tang" no aparece en ninguna parte aquí, por lo que, en ausencia de contexto, la redirección es confusa, especialmente para "sonidos onomatopéyicos" generales como tings y tangs. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:16 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

¿Quién es el líder del club que está hecho para ti y para mí?

Esta línea no se encuentra en el artículo de destino. Las personas que utilicen este término en lugar de buscar "Marcha de Mickey Mouse", no recibirán contenido relacionado con su término de búsqueda. Actualmente es imposible verificar si esta línea es de hecho de esta canción (basándonos en la falta de material en el espacio principal de Wikipedia aquí), por lo que, en ausencia de cualquier contenido o material relacionado con el "líder del club", esta redirección no es útil. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:13 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Trabajabas como camarera en un bar de cócteles.

No se menciona ningún "bar de cócteles" en el artículo de destino. No se menciona ninguna "camarera" en el artículo de destino. Esta es una letra aparentemente sin importancia, y las personas que buscan esto en lugar del título natural " Don't You Want Me " de la canción, probablemente estén buscando material directamente relacionado con su término de búsqueda, que no existe aquí. No existe ninguna verificación para las personas que no saben si terminaron en el lugar correcto. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:10 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Por suerte, "I get knocked down" SÍ se menciona, CON una fuente, en Tubthumping ! EZPZ! Y también aparece en la portada del álbum, ¡guau! Por lo tanto, I get knocked down está fundamentado y no tenía ninguna intención de que lo eliminaran. Es probable, y se puede demostrar, con el contenido del artículo en la página de destino. Por cierto, buena canción. ^^ Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 04:02, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

El ejército alemán marcha hacia la Madre Patria

No se mencionan las palabras "into", "motherland", "german", "army" o "march" en la página de destino. Se incluye como una cita, pero no es útil cuando no hay contexto sobre qué es la cita, quién la dijo o por qué se refiere a este álbum de Sabaton en la forma actual del artículo. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:06 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Mi té se enfrió, me pregunto por qué me levanté de la cama.

Letra no comentada, no hay nada escrito sobre esta línea en la página de destino. La forma natural de buscar canciones es escribiendo el nombre de la canción. No hay garantía, y no debería haber garantía, de que escribir la primera línea o cualquier línea de la canción te lleve A la canción. En este caso, las personas que buscan una letra esperarán ver material relacionado con la búsqueda que usaron (es decir, una letra). Como mínimo, una mención. Pero no existe ninguna, y no existe verificación para esta línea en el artículo de destino. (Además, también es una letra en Stan (canción de Eminem) , que ese artículo vincula a esta canción como el tercer enlace wiki en la página). No es necesario que una línea ambigua no mencionada sea una redirección a una canción en particular cuando no hay garantía de que la gente la esté buscando. "Stan" y "Thank You" ya tienen muchos enlaces entre los dos. Utopes ( discusión / continuación ) 20:58, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]

Nikostratos, guerrero grecorromano

No hay una base o un objetivo claros, no se menciona en el objetivo actual. Es posible que se vuelva a apuntar a Nicostratus (mitología) , pero el título transmite varias ideas diferentes con los aspectos grecorromanos y guerreros. Eliminar por falta de claridad. TNstingray ( discusión ) 20:27 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Factores externos de la planta

¿Es "???" una razón válida? Creado como un fragmento de coherencia discutible, actualmente demasiado vago para ser utilizado en cualquier lugar. Incluso podría estar sujeto a diferentes definiciones de "planta" cogsan (regañame) (acechame) 19:39, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar por estar mal formado y, como era de esperar, no utilizado. Chiswick Chap ( discusión ) 02:02 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

WRYYYYYYYY

¿Demasiadas ys? wryyy ya existe, y dudo que sea necesario escribir más de 3 para una especie de frase de moda cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 19:25, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

El mundo (arma)

Los stands no son inherentemente "armas". Los stands como Emperor (una pistola) y Anubis (una katana) son armas bastante literales, y Heritage for the Future tiene "stands de armas" (que es una mecánica de juego, no una categoría literal), pero World (un fantasma potenciador) no es ninguna de las dos cosas. No puedo nombrar ningún caso notable de alguien que use un mundo como arma literal, además de quizás Amid Evil 's Celestial Garra, que dispara planetas. Cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 19:21, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Wikipedia:Solicitudes de creación

Proponer redirección a Wikipedia:Artículos para creación . El motivo es que el asistente de artículos sirve si alguien tiene un artículo que quiere empezar a escribir pero no tiene ninguna idea, no para solicitar que se cree un artículo. Impresionante Aasim 18:11, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Feedback 2400:9800:3B1:9646:1:0:84D6:D5A2 (discusión) 14:07 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

órgano(s) bucal(es)

Cerré antes con el consenso de que no somos biólogos. Lo estoy intentando de nuevo con el mismo razonamiento (que las bocas tienen otros órganos, como dientes y lenguas), así que espero que todos hayan estudiado a sus mordedores. Aunque todavía no estoy seguro de si volver a apuntar a la boca sería la mejor idea. cogsan (me regañan) (me acechan) 17:46, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Creo que la boca es la mejor opción para el órgano bucal : es el órgano bucal, solo que contiene algunos otros más pequeños. La boca es, podríamos decir, la madre de todos los órganos bucales. Cremastra ( discusión ) 00:14 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
  • No deberíamos reorientar esto a "boca". Nadie escribe "órgano bucal" en Wikipedia y espera encontrar "boca", ya que solo tenemos la palabra "boca" para eso. La razón por la que existe "órgano bucal" es para describir diferentes tipos de cosas similares a la boca. Como lo que tienen los anélidos . No describe los dientes ni la lengua. -- asilvering ( discusión ) 00:57, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
    Por definición, sí. Los dientes, al ser huesos, son un poco dudosos (¡algunos podrían decir que estaba... equivocado!), pero las lenguas , como se señala en el artículo, son órganos explícitos que están en la boca (y, por lo tanto, bucales), y también lo son los labios ahora que lo pienso de nuevo. Este artículo que encontré a los 20 minutos de buscar se refiere a los "órganos bucales" como órganos en la boca de los humanos, y este artículo hace lo mismo con las aves (y con menos sutileza). Si hay especies de aves y humanos que tienen ventosas, probablemente las pasé por alto, en cuyo caso mi mal cogsan (regámeme) (acechame) 01:46, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
    ...y por supuesto, en el momento exacto en que decido hacer clic en responder, recuerdo que hay una lista de órganos del cuerpo humano aquí, y resulta que enumera los dientes como órganos que están en la boca. ¿Cuáles son las probabilidades~? sí, sé que otras especies también tienen bocas que pueden no tener lenguas, labios o dientes, solo estoy usando a los humanos como ejemplo cogsan (regañame) (acechame) 01:49, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

T:WPMHA

~Dos enlaces entrantes. Con la existencia del alias "TM", TM:WPMHA es un atajo totalmente suficiente para navegar a esta página, en un esfuerzo por mantener un PNR confuso fuera del espacio de nombres. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 21:08, 15 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

No estoy en desacuerdo con que la redirección sea anterior a "TM:". Pero 2014 no es realmente tan viejo. Los títulos de pseudoespacios de nombres han sido muy polémicos durante mucho más de una década. Wikipedia:Redirecciones para discusión/Registro/18 de noviembre de 2013#T:WPTECH es un ejemplo de una discusión acalorada, pero los títulos T: han sido nominados desde 2010 y antes (por principio de ser títulos T:). Así que difícilmente llamaría a 2014 un "ejemplo de larga data", especialmente porque este título nunca ha resistido la prueba del tiempo. Como ejemplo, T:AC ha sido objeto de 3 RfD. T:WPMHA no ha sido objeto de ninguna, por lo que no hay precedentes de !keeping. Básicamente, recién se ha "desenterrado" a partir de hoy. Combinado con WP:NORUSH para discutir este PNR antes.
"Normalmente no mantenemos" las redirecciones entre espacios de nombres con la premisa de que "son antiguas", por lo que no estoy seguro de dónde viene esa afirmación. Ser antiguo no le otorga inmunidad a un título, especialmente si el título es problemático de otra manera, lo que es inherentemente cierto en el caso de las redirecciones entre espacios de nombres, especialmente las del espacio principal, al que nuestros lectores ocasionales recurren. El factor "problemático" se compensa con cierto nivel de utilidad demostrable, que es la razón por la que dichos títulos podrían permanecer.
Un pequeño aparte: las redirecciones de pseudo-espacio de nombres =/= redirecciones entre espacios de nombres. Los PNR de WP: están diseñados para permitir la vinculación sencilla a un título, sin necesidad de escribir el prefijo completo del espacio de nombres. "Plantilla" puede tener solo 8 letras, pero si lo escribes unas diez veces al día con fines de seguimiento, esas pulsaciones de teclas se suman. La utilidad de los PNR puede provenir tanto del uso en enlaces wiki como del uso en una barra de búsqueda.
Así que examinemos la utilidad demostrable. Este título fue creado en 2014, exclusivamente como un compromiso cuando T:WPMA estaba siendo eliminado. Desde su creación, solo ha sido utilizado por una persona, el creador, en esta página de discusión . En cuanto a los títulos T:, 1 uso por década es un valor mínimo. Los enlaces wiki son fáciles de ajustar. En cuanto al "uso en una barra de búsqueda", bueno, el alias TM: facilita el acceso a CUALQUIER plantilla ahora, por lo que todas las razones de eficiencia de la barra de búsqueda son esencialmente caput para los títulos T:. (A menos que, por alguna razón, haya una plantilla en WP que sea tan vital que sea "absolutamente necesario acortar 'TM:' a 'T:', ahorrando una sola pulsación de tecla". Ese podría haber sido el caso cuando "T:" ahorraba 7 pulsaciones de tecla, pero ahora que se redujo a 1, me sorprendería si ese fuera el caso de cualquier plantilla en WP).
Para terminar, las redirecciones entre espacios de nombres desde el espacio principal siempre son poco ideales. Los lectores ocasionales no deberían caer accidentalmente en una trampa solo para terminar en las trastiendas de Wikipedia, si pueden evitarlo. T:kort , T:SCC, entre otros, son artículos de contenido en el espacio principal que los títulos "T:" infringen activamente. Por lo tanto, los PNR de este tipo deben mantenerse al mínimo, ya que interfieren con la navegación del lector a los artículos reales. Ahora que el alias TM: es una característica que existe, predigo que la mayoría (si no todos) de los títulos "T:" se eliminarán antes de fines de 2024, pero esa es solo mi propia predicción y no sé si eso realmente ocurrirá o no. Pero siento que este es uno de los menos controvertidos que existen; es una reparación de dos enlaces comparativamente fácil y una nominación en solitario para tantear el terreno antes de una posible nominación grupal de otros títulos T:. Utopes ( discusión / continuación ) 20:03, 16 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,— TechnoSquirrel69 ( suspiro )13:53, 5 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 17:05, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Esa lista es para redirecciones que no son de Templatespace, de las cuales existen 16, dice wbm1058. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 23:13, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
La lista completa de redirecciones del prefijo T: al espacio de nombres de plantilla son las primeras 63 redirecciones que aparecen aquí. Me aseguré de que la lista fuera completa (en el momento de mi edición) haciendo una , dos o tres ediciones. De hecho, una de ellas fue a T:CENT . ¡ Es muy fácil! – wbm1058 ( discusión ) 14:08, 15 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Ryl

Me sorprendió terminar en este objetivo. Se menciona a los "Ryls", de pasada, pero hay menciones iguales en artículos sobre muchos otros libros de Baum (incluidos The Runaway Shadows y Nelebel's Fairyland ). La bibliografía de L. Frank Baum indica que es parte del título de varias de sus obras. También es el nombre del protagonista de Pastures of the Blue Crane y, en mayúsculas, es un acrónimo de Radical Youth League . El objetivo actual es el resultado de Wikipedia:Artículos para eliminar/Knook de 2011, pero el administrador de cierre ( SilkTork ) dijo que no había acuerdo sobre [un] objetivo. con dos lugares diferentes (ninguno de los cuales incluye una mención en su versión actual) sugeridos. En Google, el tema principal es una marca de té helado, pero no parece que tengamos contenido sobre eso. No estoy seguro de cuál es la mejor opción aquí, ¿quizás la desambiguación? Thryduulf ( discusión ) 17:04 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

dabify . buen trabajo, ip :3 cogsan (me regañas) (me acechas) 20:11 15 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

ps triple

probando la herramienta mass xfd, lo siento de antemano por cualquier error. un meme, de un tipo llamado chad warden, que parodió la guerra de consolas gen 7. los únicos contextos en los que se usa este nombre son como referencias a chad, como un meme de siivagunner (que en realidad también es chad warden), y en contextos diversos en los que "ps" no significa "playstation". (des)afortunadamente, chad y el meme asociado con él no son notables cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 16:17, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar según nombre. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 16:31 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Punto abierto/n°1

Estos son los nombres de las dos primeras pistas, pero no es un término de búsqueda probable y está bastante abierto a la interpretación. Cremastra ( discusión ) 14:06 14 oct 2024 (UTC) Cremastra ( discusión ) 14:06 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Educación en línea

RfD anteriores para esta redirección y redirecciones similares:

Parece ambiguo. También existe la escuela en línea . 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 13:02, 27 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 11:03, 15 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a incluir en la lista para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la nueva inclusión:(Involucrado) Se vuelve a incluir en la lista porque el registro del 15 de septiembre ya no aparece en la página principal de RfD.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 09:40, 6 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la nueva publicación:publicación final. ¿Se debe volver a publicar paraaprendizaje en líneao paraescuela en línea?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 08:07, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

reorientar al aprendizaje en línea . En este caso, creo que un poco sería más útil, ya que también incluye todos los objetivos sugeridos (y algunos más) cogsan (regáchame) (acechame) 16:20, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

26 de noviembre de 2006

Este día no se comenta en la página de destino. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 15:52 15 sep 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar por nominación. Huracán Clyde 🌀 ¡mi página de discusión! 20:27, 15 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Eliminar por nombre —  JohnFromPinckney ( discusión / ediciones ) 16:55 16 sep 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Eliminar , por, nom. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 21:34 16 sep 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
¿Eh? No hay nada malo con el formato. "Día, Mes, Año" es totalmente plausible. El problema es la falta de cobertura de esta fecha en el espacio principal, para un término de búsqueda en el espacio principal que los lectores predicen y esperan que termine en el espacio principal al escribirlo. Un enlace azul aquí es engañoso para los posibles buscadores, cuando no tenemos cobertura en el espacio principal para dicho término. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 05:19, 17 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Está bien, entonces, redirijamos a Portal:Eventos actuales/26 de noviembre de 2006 , donde hay muchos enlaces del espacio principal a eventos que sucedieron ese día. -- T avix ( discusión ) 13:09 17 sep 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar un debate más exhaustivo y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 09:35, 6 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la publicación:Un intento más... ¿Eliminar o reorientar?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 08:04, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

  • Eliminar el retargeting solo justificaría la creación de redirecciones similares. Además, el uso de varias comas no suele ser habitual.
- C HAMPION ( discusión ) ( contribuciones ) ( registros ) 10:03 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Sé que no has citado explícitamente a WP:PANDORA , pero "... sólo justificaría la creación de redirecciones similares" es prácticamente lo que es un argumento de WP:PANDORA , así que te voy a dirigir a WP:GETBACKINTHERE . 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 14:52 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
Reorientación según Tavix y Utopes. El formato de día/mes/año es completamente plausible, y el único problema es una coma adicional, que, si se agrega un carácter adicional por accidente, no debería afectar la plausibilidad lo suficiente como para eliminarla. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( discusión ) 14:55 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
En realidad, prefiero la eliminación , así que no diría que es por mi culpa. El formato está totalmente bien, pero como no hay cobertura en el espacio principal de este término de búsqueda enciclopédico, ir a un portal donde no hay prosa enciclopédica ni material editable no es lo ideal. Utopes ( discusión / cont ) 20:02, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Wpedia

Redireccionamiento inverosímil. No hay resultados en Google para su uso como forma abreviada de "Wikipedia" -1ctinus📝 🗨 21:45, 29 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,— TechnoSquirrel69 ( suspiro )01:59, 7 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 07:53, 14 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Junta Presidencial

Eliminar por ser un término vago. Las búsquedas arrojan una mezcla de resultados sobre entidades políticas y juntas directivas de universidades. Champion (alt) ( discusión ) 06:12 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

13 de octubre

Tata (rey persa)

No había persas en la época de Tata Викидим ( discusión ) 21:48 13 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Eliminar por nombre. Los persas no habían sido creados como una etnia separada en ese momento. Ahri Boy ( discusión ) 00:26 14 oct 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Crisólito

No se menciona en el objetivo con esta ortografía específica; ¿es tan ambiguo como Crisólito ? 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:55, 10 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, CycloneYoris talk! 10:30, 19 de septiembre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la publicación:¿Conservar o eliminar?
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,— TechnoSquirrel69 ( suspiro )05:33, 3 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Se volvió a publicar para generar una discusión más exhaustiva y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la publicación:Un intento más. También se notificó esta discusión en Chrysolite.
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 18:29, 13 de octubre de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]

Grandview (typeface) and others

These redirects point to articles where there is no mention of the subject at the target. They are similar to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Tenorite (typeface). My opinion is to delete as Enwiki appears to have no substantive material about them, but the decision should be consistent with the result of the other RfD. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all to Aptos (typeface)#History, where all three are discussed-- the article tells you what they are, why they were important, what happened to them, and even where you can get them now, which in total is information I'd find substantive. As I mention in the one for Tenorite, an alternative might be to delete as per WP:REDLINK to encourage article creation; however, I'm not sure they're notable enough for their own articles. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bumping trains

Not mentioned in the article, nothing in wikt:bumping. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, potentially add mention: Apparently, this is a decently well-known term for evading train/subway fare. https://www.mylondon.news/lifestyle/travel/london-train-expert-explains-youd-26292881 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Catcher's mitt

Originally targeted Baseball glove, but was retargeted without explanation in 2009. Seems a pretty obvious WP:DIFFCAPS case to me; suggest reverting to old target. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 08:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Baseball glove as the clear primary target for this title, and put a hatnote on both. jlwoodwa (talk) 18:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget and hatnote, per above. Note there was already a hatnote on Catcher's Mitt, but it was in the wrong place (under lead) and so was rendering incorrectly on mobile web - I've just fixed that. BugGhost🦗👻 08:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mick Armstrong

Not mentioned in target. TarnishedPathtalk 06:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The proposed target has also been proposed for deletion. Notified of this discussion there as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ronnie Cowan (rugy union)

This redirect has an interesting history—it was left over from a move to the target's base title back when it was still about the rugby player with that name, then that was moved to the correctly spelled Ronnie Cowan (rugby union) (a plausible title worth keeping) a minute later, and then the page at the base title was converted to a disambiguation page...while this redirect was never picked up and stayed pointing at the disambiguation page. I know pointing readers to a disambiguation page with this misspelled title isn't the right course of action, but I'm not sure what we should do with it—delete it or retarget it to Ronnie Cowan (rugby), or another route? Thoughts? Regards, SONIC678 06:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3.1415926535…

Delete. This has been created a few months ago. It is just the maximum number of digits that Wikipedia happens to allow for a page title. This is not a reasonable search term, and I would argue it fails rule #8 of WP:RFD#DELETE: being a novel or obscure synonym that's unlikely to be useful. The edit summary for its creation, which is "255 (the max) number of characters. Lol.", also makes me wonder if this was a joke edit (this user has had something of an "obsession" with the 255 character limit, compare this example). Renerpho (talk) 04:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Some readers may stumble on a very long series of digits and not realize it is pi, so they would search it up, truncating as necessary. Ca talk to me! 15:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And where does "truncating as necessary" at exactly 255 digits come in? Truncating at 256 will result in an error, and truncating at 254 leads to a redirect that doesn't exist. Renerpho (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not for typing, it's for copy-and-pasing. If you paste 255+ digits of pi into Wikipedia, it would truncate to this redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 01:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK this is not how the search engines work. If one types more that this exact number of digits, search engines will not truncate the token to our 256 characters and will not point to our article (try Google). If the search is done inside Wikipedia, the long prompt will actually work and elicit a Pi suggestion without this redirect (the redirect will actually be confusing as it will distract attention for the actual article). Викидим (talk) 06:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question from nominator: To those arguing for keep, are you saying we should have a redirect from all the other possible lengths? Do you recognize that this goes against most previous discussions involving redirects to truncated versions of pi? We have some, like all up to 3.14159265358979323846264338, but most others -- including some like 3.14159265358979323846264338327950, which is actually mentioned in another article and could be a useful search term, but has been deleted per R3: Recently-created, implausible redirect -- are missing. See also this old deletion discussion, and this one. I'm sure there are others; both of these have resulted in the deletion of multiple similar redirects for the same reason, and are given as examples.
If that argument doesn't hold then we should have 255 different redirects, one from each possible truncation, plus a note on the policy page that such redirects are considered useful per community discussion. Renerpho (talk) 13:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: It's actually all up to 3.1415926535897932384626433832795.
(It was also nominated for deletion, but it was kept due to the 32-digit version being useful for the floating point reason that you mentioned. I guess the extra 0 was too much.
Not sure if there's a similar use case for 255 digits.) ApexParagon (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, 3.14159265358979323846264338327 doesn't exist since 2011, and 3.1415926535897932384626433832 was deleted in 2015. Renerpho (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The latter is of course different from the others, because it was an article, not a redirect. It was deleted under A7 (Article about a website, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject), which is a reason I wouldn't have thought about. One could argue whether it should have been turned into a redirect at the time. I would say no, for the same reasons to delete the other one(s), but you could. Renerpho (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it's obviously the right target and it's a plausible redirect (someone who sees pi written down this way and copies as much as wikipedia allows in the search box). Stop and consider "realistically, if a user typed this into a search box and pressed enter, where should they go?" Do the delete voters seriously think that a "0 search results" page is a better target for this than Pi? BugGhost🦗👻 23:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a straw-man argument, because a "0 search results" is not what's in question. Have you actually tried it? If a user copy/pastes 254 digits, the redirect won't help them, but the autocomplete gives them Pi even if we delete the redirect (they always get autocompleted to 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751, which is not in question). And if they copy/paste 256 or more (which they absolutely can do), they'll also get an autocomplete for Pi -- unless they actually press search, in which case they get an error message. In neither of those cases, the redirect is of any help. Renerpho (talk) 00:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sidepiece (DJs)

Music duo containing both Party Favor (DJ) and Nitti Gritti, both of which have articles. We can't have a redirect where two possible targets are the most logical. Jalen Barks (Woof) 04:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 12

National Sports Administration

This redirect is likely too general to be correctly associated with the target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:28, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erie Von Detten

Simply not an alternative name. This was created in the early 2000s, but was redirected to Eriee Von. It hasn’t received an edit since 2005, and averages 0 views a day. Roasted (talk) 21:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bot policy

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image use

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No original research

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion policy

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Banning policy

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking policy

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Username policy

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Days

Used to redirect to Day, but was retargeted by DeCausa in July 2024. Some of the links to this redirect seem to be intended for Day, and some are intended for the song. I'm starting a discussion at RfD because I expect retargeting to be the outcome, but if Days (The Kinks song) is the primary topic for "Days", then it should be moved to this title per WP:MISPLACED. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Scottish Nose-pickers

Little Evidence that this is a title that would be searched for. Only a reference to Nicola Sturgeon Picking her nose can be found using this search term. See no need for a redirect on that basis. Blethering Scot 15:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2032 Copa América

WP:TOOSOON. The hosts for even the 2028 games aren't decided. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dietary biology of the of the Nile crocodile

This redirect began its history as an article about the subject, which was then redirected to the correctly titled (and almost exactly duplicate) article that was created less than 6½ days later. It's also gotten nine pageviews in the last year compared to the target's 9,710, which further muddies its plausibility, so I thought I'd send it to RfD to discuss this matter. I'd like to hear all your thoughts about this. Regards, SONIC678 06:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joining the of Russian Orthodox churches in Western Europe to the Moscow Patriarchate

This redirect is a leftover from a move back in February 2020 to the correct title, which I'm not sure is plausible to be kept lying around, especially since it hasn't been used much (it's gotten 118 views during its lifetime, which is pretty small since that equates to less than 1 view per 15 days). Delete unless someone can provide a justification. Regards, SONIC678 06:41, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JD "the Couch" Vance

I get that this was a meme but I don't think it's really appropriate and after this election cycle it won't really make a lot of sense. Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/06/harris-walz-first-rally-takeaways
This article likens him as "the couch", so idk about the nickname being nonexistent YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 14:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget as per Thryduulf. The proposed new target explains where the nickname came from, and why. Removing the redirect at this juncture because "it'll be irrelevant after this election cycle" is running into WP:CRYSTAL issues-- we're not yet after this election cycle, are we? When and if it truly becomes irrelevant, is when we should remove the redirect. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:25, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Couch sex

The first thing I think of is not JD Vance or Hillbilly Elegy. I get that this was a meme but I don't think it's really appropriate and after this election cycle it won't really make a lot of sense. Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having sex with couch

I get that this was a meme but I don't think it's really appropriate and after this election cycle it won't really make a lot of sense. Dr vulpes (Talk) 06:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_September_4#Couch_sex also the first thing I think of when I read this title was not JD Vance or Hillbilly Elegy. I get that this was a meme but I don't think it's really appropriate and after this election cycle it won't really make a lot of sense. Dr vulpes (Talk) 19:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

K'gari (local council), Queensland

I would like to delete this redirect. It was originally created by someone who must have wrongly thought that it was a local council, when it is an island. As per WP:RFD#DELETE, I think it meets the criteria of causing confusion as it may lead anyone stumbling on it to think there is or was a council of that name. Kerry (talk) 05:54, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of speakers of the of the Wisconsin State Assembly

I'm not sure this redirect is plausible with the repeated "of the" in the title—the correctly formatted List of speakers of the Wisconsin State Assembly was created last month—and plus nothing really links to it, so I thought I'd bring it over to RfD to discuss. I'm leaning towards deletion, but I'm open to being swayed otherwise. Thoughts? Regards, SONIC678 04:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

American American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6.


October 11

Allan Cerda

Cerda is not listed as a player on the team, and according to his MLB profile, he has played for several teams, so I'm not sure what the best redirect would be. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-BLAR page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Same reasoning as before. Not sure why this wasn't deleted before re-listing.-- Yankees10 18:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:26, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fântânele River (Mureș)

Was redirected under a verifiability concern years ago. Fântânele River doesn't list it. Can't find it on either OSM or Google maps. Used to also have Kutas-patak redirected to it, but that's a waterway somewhere else. Looks like this was the result of some sort of a confusion. Joy (talk) 19:18, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:24, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misbehaviour

Not actually helpful redirects. The reader expects a description of, well, bad behaviour, but instead is redirected to a page that describes "behaviour" in general and doesn't describe misbehaviour in the sense of a kid pulling the cat's tail. Misbehaviour isn't actually the antonym of "behaviour" here, even though it sounds like one. The behaviour article discusses behaviour in its broadest biological and societal sense. Soft redirection to wiktionary seems the best option here. Cremastra (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Melonade

Not mentioned at target; listed in Lucozade#Variants but there is also a more general Wiktionary entry at wikt:melonade. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Independence of Path

These should presumably point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned Suikoden characters (2)

None of these are mentioned at the target. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Add link to the #Unmentioned Suikoden characters discussion which is mentioned several times in this RfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Surnames from the name Leib

deletion requested, the target doesn't contain any surnames from the name Leib but only lists persons with the surname Leib. One would expect derived surnames like Leibovich, Leibovitz, etc. Hodsha (talk) 21:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pita Revilla

Pita Revilla is the mother of Bernard Palanca and Miko Palanca ([34]). A one-sentence article was created but reverted per WP:NOTINHERITED. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:17, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep current target, as Bernard's article is the only one with information about the subject. Jalen Barks (Woof) 16:47, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zelda: The Wand of Gannon

his name was initially inconsistently spelled, with "gannon" having been used from 1 to alttp in japan, and only in 1 (and later zelda's adventure, but no one cares about that one) in not japan, so it was already out of the equation by the time the cd-i games were out. point is, getting two names mixed up and using an outdated spelling of that name doesn't seem that plausible cogsan talk page? contribs? it's yours, my friend 13:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, plausible and unambiguous; deletion of this does not improve wikipedia BugGhost🦗👻 17:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very Weak Keep. I will point out that even though Gamelon and Ganon are not the same word, they DO start and end with the same letters. Given Gamelon only appears in this game, while Ganon is the name of the series' overarching antagonist(s), it's perhaps plausible to get the two confused-- "Okay, so the name is Wand of... something? Starts with a G, ends with N... oh, silly me, it's Ganon!"
However-- and this is a big however-- the addition of misspelling Ganon does reduce plausibility a little more-- however, I would like to point out that this is also an extremely common misspelling of Ganon's name, so perhaps it doesn't hurt plausibility as much as it first appears?
I won't fight too terribly hard if it's deemed that this combo is still too implausible to be considered. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:57, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Research impact

Delete. The redirect is a very broad concept (the impact of research), and the target is very specific (a programme that evaluates the impact of research in the UK). If we have an article that discusses research impact, the general concept, this should be retargeted there; otherwise it should be deleted to encourage article creation, since the current target is country-specific and doesn't explain what "research impact" is. Even the target's "research impact" section merely quotes the programme's own definition of research impact, without any hints about this definition's usefulness outside the UK. Nyttend (talk) 06:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legendary beast

Doesn't this also refer to Suicune/Raikou/Entei? DAB based on legendary bird. Web-julio (talk) 04:36, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to raikou without much prejudice to a dab, at least for now, as it's the best- uh, the first one in the pokédex, and the legendary kitties manage to be the primary topic for the entire term by a longer shot than they probably should be. results for "legendary beast" -pokémon and similar searches gave me...
  • the behemoth... but specifically the one from final fantasy 14... and specifically the name of a quest related to it in monster hunter: world
  • a toy company, seemingly big fans of comic books. no article for it though
  • a lot of books, most of which are partial matches like "the first legendary beast master", or "the legendary beast of kara". no articles for any of them though
  • pokémon. i specified that i didn't want pokémon, and google gave me pokémon
even then, most results were just descriptions of things, like "wow those gym guys sure are legendary beasts, that's real muscular of their muscles", or terminology from live service games. if sources can be found for leviathan and its wacky buddies, it'll probably justify a dab. as is though, i find it pretty unlikely that the term would be used for anything other than the pokémon, even though that really shouldn't be the case here. how does it just gobble up basic terms like this for itself, d*ng cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
drafted a dab regardless, by the by cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Legendary creature is the WP:PTOPIC here, not individual Pokémon, but I would support adding a "For legendary Pokémon, see List of Pokémon" hatnote seeing as it could potentially be helpful. BugGhost🦗👻 17:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A dab has already been drafted below the redirect, but there's still not enough support for closing this yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for the closer. If kept, at least the DAB can be put at Legendary beast (disambiguation), as it's already drafted in the main page. Web-julio (talk) 02:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fendlerella utahensis

Fendlerella is no long a monotypic taxon according to Plants of the World Online. The redirect should be deleted to eliminate the false blue links in lists of species and encourage article creation. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Women's Finalissima

No information at the target about the event, better left as a red link for the time being. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disqualify as per above. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Futsal Finalissima

No information at the target about the event, better left as a red link for the time being. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per above. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:38, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DC Super Hero Girls (disambiguation)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

The [console]: round 2: the revengening

same case as the others, but not previously nominated. nominating separately just in case cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh wait
delete the playstation4 and the playstationiv as malformed. should have noticed them before cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - I know they seem a bit redundant, but the "the"'s do actually get used. eg "the Wii", "the PlayStation 4", and "the Wii U" are all used in this article on Britannica, "the Wii U" and "the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3" and "the Switch" in this Guardian article. "The" + [games console] is a pretty common structure. BugGhost🦗👻 15:12, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. As per WP:CHEAP; redundancy is not an issue for a redirect; the important question to ask is if A: it's possible that it could be typed, and B: it goes to the correct place. B is unquestionably correct for every single one of these-- and with A, as per BugGhost people do refer to these consoles as "The [console]"; it's not outside the realm of possibility that they could be typed as such in the search bar. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:31, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS3 Media

what is "media" here? games? music? persona 5? originally created as a short paragraph about how the ps3 can Do Things™ cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The [console]

closed before with no consensus (on the properly capitalized ones, that is). consensus, in slightly more recent times, seems to be that the "the" is not all that necessary. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:02, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all - (my comment on the similar RFD here.) The Dreamcast article's opening paragraph starts with The Dreamcast is the final home video game console manufactured by Sega, Nintendo Entertainment System starts with The Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) is an 8-bit home video game console produced by Nintendo., Playstation 3 starts with The PlayStation 3 (PS3) is a home video game console developed and marketed by Sony Computer Entertainment., and Playstation 4 starts with The PlayStation 4 (PS4) is a home video game console developed by Sony Interactive Entertainment.. BugGhost🦗👻 15:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually on closer inspection Redirect The PlayStation to PlayStation (console), as it's current target is the brand PlayStation, rather than the original PlayStation console. Keep the rest. BugGhost🦗👻 15:27, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget The PlayStation to Playstation (console); Keep the rest, as per BugGhost. As per WP:CHEAP; redundancy is not an issue for a redirect; the important question to ask is if A: it's possible that it could be typed, and B: it goes to the correct place. B is unquestionably correct for every single one of these except for The PlayStation -- and with A, as per BugGhost people do refer to these consoles as "The [console]"; it's not outside the realm of possibility that they could be typed as such in the search bar. edit 15:36, 11 October 2024 (UTC) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PSX2

would make sense, since the ps1's codename was "psx", but that wasn't the case for the ps2, so no one refers to it as that. also not to be confused with the psx that was... a video recorder with a ps2 grafted to it (technology was weird back then), or anything in psx. there is an emulator called "psx 2" (not to be confused with pcsx2), but it doesn't have its own article yet, and doesn't seem to be for the ps2 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PlayStation Dos

no particular affinity with any language that uses "dos" as "two". results were mostly related to some weird fictional language's use of "dos", as the plural form of "of" (so "...alguns dos melhores jogos de playstation" actually means "...some of the best playstation games"), with no particular affinity with the ps2 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:14, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Delete this one as per WP:RLANG. We're not the spanish Wikipedia. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 10

Soft D

I believe this has nothing to do with Finnish. Re-target to Danish phonology. There is not mention of a "soft D" on the Finnish page. There is, however, a relatively well-known concept in Danish called "blødt d" which is even talked about on the new target page. Furthermore, if you Google "soft d," all the results will be for the Danish concept in question, indicating its relevance to the new tarket, and not to the current target. Diriector_Doc├─────┤TalkContribs 22:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:University of Maryland alumni

Is this the right place to discuss cat redirects? In any case, University of Maryland redirects to University of Maryland, College Park, not University System of Maryland, so retarget to Category:University of Maryland, College Park alumni. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 21:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is the correct place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No relation

WP:SSRT: "only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects. We don't need a soft redirect for every possible word or phrase to be included in Wikipedia." Fram (talk) 11:40, 3 October 2024 (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) 18:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

F-duction

Not mentioned at target. Appears in the Index of genetics articles (despite being a redirect, though the page also contains a bunch of redlinks), and is mentioned in the article about Edward A. Adelberg, who apparently discovered this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:06, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of characters in Suikoden

Target contains no such list. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Add link to the #Unmentioned Suikoden characters discussion which is mentioned twice in this RfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-redirect page history? Also notified of this discussion at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:52, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. list(s) not present. list of characters in suikoden had one (1) source and nothing else, and was written almost entirely in an in-universe style. won't debate the reliability of the source in question because it's down and so is the internet archive :c, and the thing it would be about (that being the hero's name) is not present in the target anyway cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tellurane

Tellurane is not hydrogen telluride, but a heterocyclic compound 109.52.57.238 (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cincinnati Bengals (AFL)

Should probably point to the modern Cincinnati Bengals, who also played in an American Football League. O.N.R. (talk) 02:04, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carrotion

Not really a plausible phonetic misspelling, nor a plausible typo. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could be, but like all misspellings, if it's a plausible misspelling or OCR error for multiple words, then it doesn't make a useful redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 05:39, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There can be exceptions to that, e.g. if one use is very significantly more common in practice than any other, but that isn't the case here. I didn't find any examples of this being an OCR error for "Carotene", indeed it would be an unlikely OCR error (based on my experience) in a couple of ways: while "o" ↔ "n" is quite common, "e" → "n" is uncommon and "r" → "rr" is very unusual. Unlike human misspellings, where substituting single for double letters and vice versa is very common (it's probably the most common type of misspelling I make) OCR errors rarely change the number of vertical strokes, especially in the middle of words, even if they sometimes distribute them wrongly (e.g. "rn" ↔ "m" ↔ "in"). Thryduulf (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete per "what is this even a typo of?" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:54, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan try reading other people's comments. This doesn't seem to be a typo of anything, but it is a plausible but not overly common misspelling of "corrosion". Thryduulf (talk) 21:15, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
good cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:48, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Symbolism (arts)

The most common use of symbolism in association with the arts is when a concrete element within a visual, literary, or other work of art is used to represent an abstract idea. Currently, the landing place for that type of symbolism seems to simply be Symbol (15 October UPDATE: I've now made a new landing page for this exact concept: Artistic symbol). "Symbolism" as a specific 19th-century social movement is a much more narrow and obscure usage. Similarly worded redirects (namely Symbolism (art) and Symbolism in art) also ought to be redirected accordingly. Wolfdog (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfdog I'm not certain I understand your nomination. Are you saying that Symbolism (arts) is targetting the correct place, but Symbolism (art) and Symbolism in art should be retargetted to match? Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is my first time using RFD, so excuse my inexperience but, no, I'm saying it's targeting the wrong place. It's currently targeting Symbolism (movement). Wolfdog (talk) 00:05, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, the target should be the current target of the redirect. I'll fix it and add the other redirects you mentioned to the nomination. Thryduulf (talk) 00:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Ok duh, haha, thanks. Should I clear out our above discussion? Wolfdog (talk) 00:34, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No it's useful context. Thryduulf (talk) 00:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's never lupus

Seems as though these redirect formerly targeted You Don't Want to Know prior to that article being WP:BLARed last year. As it stands, the target article does not mention these phrases, and these phrases seem to be a quote, which may not be too helpful if it's targeting a episode page for a season of a television show. Steel1943 (talk) 21:36, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Even I, who never watch the program, know that's a reference to House. There should be a season page which is relevant, if the episode page has been deleted. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]
They currently redirect to the most relevant season page, given their previous target. Steel1943 (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep in some form. It's a well-known phrase from the show that shows up in its own marketing [35] and in academic literature [36][37][38] There's an AV Club review that mentions that the episode was finally Lupus and there's some articles discussing the phrase [39][40].
-- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

!(*$

Can only be accomplished by holding the shift key during the entirety of typing as it will not occur with caps lock. Unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 21:18, 2 October 2024 (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, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redriect to Grawlix, per Thryduulf BugGhost🦗👻 09:11, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, given it seems to be ambiguous between two bad targets. Cremastra (talk) 13:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i was initially not going to opine here, but... nah. delete. 1984 has no particular affinity with accidentally holding shift, doing that anyway can be brushed off as what is colloquially known as a "skill issue" which the average joe would likely spot and fix, and grawlix has no more affinity with !(*$ than it does with $@)¨(, @$¨)!, or !&&)!# cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Grawlix has no special affinity with any particular sequence, that standard would disallow a redirect from any example of it which would clearly be detrimental to readers. Thryduulf (talk) 19:34, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lightlike separation

Not mentioned at target; brief explanation exists at Lorentz transformation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UPD: Searching for the adjective, Special relativity#Invariant interval appears to be a good target. (There should presumably be redirects from lightlike separated, timelike separated and spacelike separated as well.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Why do you think this should have a different target from Lightlike? I don't see how they're distinct. jlwoodwa (talk) 16:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Causal structure only seems to talk about tangent vectors (and therefore does not mention "separation")... The redirects in the nomination below could point to Special relativity#Invariant interval as well, though that section could also be linking to the causal structure article. It's mostly an issue with how the content is organised. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Thanks for explaining. I think lightlike shouldn't redirect to a target that's too specific to discuss non-tangent vectors, then – but that's for the discussion below. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spacelike vector

These should point at the same target, but it seems like Causal structure is the most appropriate option. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:11, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missoes

i was going to retarget it back to missões and call it a day, but there's a non-zero chance that that could also apply to some plot points from the guaraní war, the seven peoples of the missions, or some other stuff i might be missing. kinda torn between just retargeting or considering dabifying at missões (in which case i'd probably take that to afd or something with the suggestion of retargeting it to missões, brazil) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i just realized the outcome of this redirect would have been irrelevant to the possible move discussion regarding missões, and i really could have just retargeted anyway. is this grounds for a mix of withdraw and retarget? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 01:13, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack)

I'm nominating this one separately because of its history—it apparently used to be an article about the movie's soundtrack until a deletion discussion in April 2017 (the participants of which that resulted in it being redirected to the current target. Aside from spikes in 2021 and 2022, it hasn't been getting very many pageviews since then, so I'm not 100% sure we need this lying around, plus I've also created the correctly spelled Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack) (which should help readers find the intended target), so I'd like to hear all your thoughts about this. Also, the participants of the deletion discussion (TheLongTone, Jennica, Bovineboy2008, Serial Number 54129, and Jo-Jo Eumerus) might want to weigh in on the matter, so I'm pinging them in case they have anything they might want to add. Regards, SONIC678 05:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Atoms

Not a common or likely misspelling, virtually no incoming targets. If for some reason it is kept, I would say retarget to the John Adams dab page. Otherwise, my vote is Delete. TNstingray (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/

subpage redirect that doesn't actually lead to a subpage. created by a blocked user, who seems to have created a lot of malformed redirects like this cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not really related but i just realized this is a redirect to rfd in rfd. ow my brain cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

R v R (Rape: marital exemption)

Redundant redirect due to the existence of R v R. Previously redirected to Marital_rape#Ending_the_exemption but I would argue that its still not needed as the case confirmed the end of any exemption. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usurper King

There have been plenty of real historical figures described as usurper kings, including in some Wikipedia articles. This redirect is therefore too ambiguous to target to this character. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete. not even an old tiktok meme like great king of evil (though i'd nominate that one too, as the meme invariably includes his name). off the top of my head, the wasp king (as in the guy from bug fables) also fits the bill cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

S-compact space

This seems to be a different concept that is not described anywhere. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:11, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tebasaki

japanese deep fried chicken wing. defined on wiktionary, only mentioned in passing in other articles, and unmentioned in the target cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:09, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

is this... a case of "thing, japan"? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Nagoya cuisine All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:40, 2 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Murgh

created as "urdu for 'chicken'", but apparently only sees use in the context of indian curries, and doesn't seem to be mentioned outside of the page history, the previous discussion, and butter chicken. see also murg i guess cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Mills (New Zealand cricketer cricketer)

This repetitive redirect is a leftover from a 2015 move to the correctly formatted counterpart. I'm not sure someone would search "cricketer cricketer" rather than just "cricketer," further muddying this thing's plausibility. Regards, SONIC678 05:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can delete "John Mills (New Zealand cricketer cricketer)". It must have been set up as either a typo or a joke, and I don't see how it can serve any useful purpose.
Sammyrice (talk) 06:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha-chlornaltrexamine

The target article is specifically about β-chlornaltrexamine; while there is a cited mention of its isomer α-Chlornaltrexamine at the target, it is generally potentially misleading and confusing to redirect names of different compounds to articles about other specific compounds. Delete these redirects to encourage article creation about the isomer and avoid confusion. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:REDYES and to avoid confusion per nom. TNstingray (talk) 13:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:JDELANOY

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Disaster recovery

Should probably more appropriately target Emergency management#Recovery. Many, many links to due to it being from a page move and I don't know which tool to use to automate a fix. Tule-hog (talk) 02:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesty ping to Kvng for any thoughts on the retarget. Tule-hog (talk) 02:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should create Disaster recovery (disambiguation) and redirect there. Why are we at RfD with this? ~Kvng (talk) 02:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only because I have no idea how to handle all the 'links to this page's, feel free to delete this! Disambiguation could be good, but I'm not sure of the guidelines of how many articles are needed to justify it. Tule-hog (talk) 02:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation pages can be made with only two examples, but more commonly in that situation there's a WP:PTOPIC that we link to first, with a hatnote linking to the other article. If there's three pages to be disambiguated, a DAB page is much more likely, and four nearly assures we'll want a DAB. So it's not a binary black/white thing, but more a gradient.Fieari (talk) 04:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Potential Disaster recovery topics:
~Kvng (talk) 15:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Started! Would it be possible to automate changing the 'links here' from Disaster recovery to point to IT disaster recovery? (Or maybe thats generally bad form on WP?) Tule-hog (talk) 17:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe there's a bot that can do that and arguably it won't make things worse. I've done a quick review and there seem to be quite a few instances where the target is wrong. ~Kvng (talk) 17:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 9

Lists of Pokémon

Is this ambiguous or should it be retargeted to List of Pokémon? Web-julio (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While title-wise it's not exactly correct, the end result is pretty harmless; the page Lists about Pokémon starts with a link to the proposed target (List of Pokémon, before listing off quite a few methods of drilling down to more specific Pokémon (i.e. lists by generation), et cetera. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. the Lists about Pokémon is a recreation with other additions, the old page didn't include non-species Pokémon lists. Guessitsavis restored the redirect and I restored the list back and moved to make it less ambiguous. Whether the redirect should be restored or not would be a discussion for AfD, right? Or a merge discussion. Web-julio (talk) 23:58, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tenorite (typeface)

Not mentioned at target, meaning it's a somewhat misleading redirect for someone searching for the term expecting to find information on it. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joker persona

Delete this is not a parenthetical disambiguator. The target is incorrect. There are multiple articles on personae named Joker listed at Joker (disambiguation), where the normal course would be to have "Joker persona" in a sentence not refer to the "Persona" videogame series. Instead it would say refer to the alternate persona of the character Jack Napier or Arthur Fleck; even "joker persona" is also covered under this redirect, and that could easily refer to the common meaning of joker, a jester, a practical joker. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per reasoning. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:57, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:William Cilium

Delete - Can't seem to find any relation to the subject? estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4C Untitled Flatiron Nonfiction Summer 2023

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Next king of Denmark

Delete - Per WP:CRYSTAL estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ingrid I of Norway

Delete - WP:CRYSTAL. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Next king of Norway

Delete - WP:CRYSTAL. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haakon VIII Magnus

Delete per this discussion [44] Also no evidence he'll use this name. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:30, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

🆓

Free is a DAB, don't see a reason for the emoji specifically to have a PTOPIC. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 20:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to the DAB page as most helpful to the reader. Cremastra (talk) 20:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cody, WY μSA

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn.

Third Lebanon War

No evidence that this conflict is known as the "Third Lebanon war", and it isn't even mentioned at target either. CycloneYoris talk! 22:13, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep plenty of sources are referring to this as the Third Lebanon War so I'd imagine its a reasonably common search term, besides there is not exactly any other war that could be considered a third lebanon war so anyone searching that is looking for what we redirect them to. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but lean retarget to 2024 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Otherwise a reasonable search term. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:57, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A new target is being proposed. Notified of this discussion there.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hunger protest in Nigeria

Too vague. I highly doubt that there has been more than one hunger protest in the history of Nigeria. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 00:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete just as nom stated. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 01:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:36, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uncle Cosmo

still not the biggest columbohead out there, but from a couple days of looking around, i haven't found any relation between this name and columbo (or columbo). is this something from later episodes that just hasn't been mentioned anywhere yet, or...? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to Regnery Publishing

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Will (sociology)

The word "will" does not even appear on the page, and it's not obvious what it's referring to. Batrachoseps (talk) 15:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Stadium

Appears to be ambiguous based on Category:Sports venues in Boston. The target is also a stadium located in Foxborough, Massachusetts, which is about 35 km southwest of Boston. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Stadium

Appears to be ambiguous based on Category:Sports venues in Toronto. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dallas Stadium

Seems ambiguous to me based on Category:Sports venues in Dallas. The target is also in Arlington, Texas, not in Dallas. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:02, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PVTTIMHALL

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Gamma squeeze

Either delete the redir or fix the content of the redir target article. The Short squeeze article currently has no mention of "gamma" or "gamma squeeze" whatsoever. N2e (talk) 10:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quran Afghanistan

Very general term; this Quran doesn't come up in the entire first page of google results. I'm not seeing a primary topic here. Rusalkii (talk) 19:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise Quran in Afghanistan . 19:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusalkii (talk • contribs)
I've added that to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converse∫edits 11:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as classic WP:XY. -1ctinus📝🗨 14:12, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an XY situation at all, as the redirect only refers to a single topic. It may or may not be vague or ambiguous, but it isn't XY. Thryduulf (talk) Thryduulf (talk) 14:44, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:31, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as too ambiguous; there are probably hundreds of Qurans in the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isometry (mathematics)

Since the primary topic Isometry is already a mathematical topic, I don't think this should be a redirect to the disambiguation page (which also seems to consist of a lot of WP:PTMs). (Note that there is also Isometry (mathematics) (disambiguation); not sure how much precedent there is for such redirects.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:03, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subcarpathian Polish Athletic Association

No mention at target. Only hit on google is MOSiR Stadium (Stalowa Wola). Cremastra (talk) 00:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Still no mention at the target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

N3rd

Probably ought to be a dab page as can conceivably refer to White N3rd of LuvBug or N3RD Street (which really ought to be at N3rd Street). Am I missing something? Launchballer 11:47, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi i am not sure how this eneded up being a redirect from n3rd street, my bad! It should be it's own standalone musician page for N3rd (he changed his name from White N3rd and yes is a part of Luv Bug who have their own wiki page already) Tommonovisio (talk) 17:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi is it possible to assist me please, so that the N3rd page can exist but we fix the issue where it became a redirect? @Launchballer Tommonovisio (talk) 20:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Tommonovisio:. I can advise that I redirected N3rd back to LuvBug as none of its claims were backed up by reliable sources; after removing them, the article did not assert why he was important or significant. If you can provide sources to back up your claims, feel free to try again, but consider starting in draftspace (i.e. Draft:N3RD).--Launchballer 00:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks I will try to find references to verify the accolades/claims! Tricky thing is that he mostly writes tunes for other people which have had success, more so than his own releases.. Tommonovisio (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate? Or retarget to Nerd (disambiguation)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yonama dialect

No search hits on the target page or on Google. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The placename Yonama (与那間) in Tokunoshima actually exists, so it's probably an undocumented dialect that's only extracted by the existence of the toponym. If that's the case, it can be deleted.
My redirects were taken from a .xlsx spreadsheet concerning metadata of Ryukyuan dialects, which is located in the .zip below.
https://repository.ninjal.ac.jp/records/2000162 Chuterix (talk) 11:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soundtack for guitar hero world tour

This is the final one of the questionably plausibly misspelled "soundtrack" redirects I'll be listing here for now. This thing used to be a stub article about the soundtrack (the initial version of which can be found here) for seven minutes on July 28, 2008 until it was turned into a redirect for the relevant section of the game's article, then about a month and a half later it was taken to the present target. It also hasn't been getting very many pageviews nowadays, so I'm not really sure we need to keep it lying around. Regards, SONIC678 06:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As per WP:CHEAP and Rich Farmbrough; save for the lack of capitalization (which isn't necessarily an error, given this redir would also scoop up "Soundtack for Guitar Hero World Tour" requests), this redirect has only one error, being, the word 'soundtrack' is missing one letter. We really don't need to worry about this one. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rich and Lunamann (welcome back LM!) - a redirect should really only be deleted (in my view) if it's pointing to the wrong place or actively doing harm in some way - just being slightly non-standard or unpopular isn't enough justification for deleting a redirect, as they are cheap and could help someone. BugGhost🦗👻 13:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, thank you, I've been away far too long :3 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Le métro de Tony Hawk

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

ß-carotin

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Srishti

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Srishti

Jamie Jungers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Jamie Jungers

Mindy Lawton

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Grood

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kerrek

Not mentioned at target. There is The Carracks, as well as multiple mentions at Critical Role campaign one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asplode

Not mentioned at target, but there is a Wiktionary entry at wikt:asplode (which does also mention the full phrase in the quotes). 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

retarget asplode to wikt:asplode, delete the other two, don't explode any heads cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:19, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should all three be retargeted or just the first one?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KGVC (FM)

Not mentioned at target, highly implausible search term given parenthetical disambiguation. AusLondonder (talk) 21:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North Takoma

Though this redirect is mentioned in the target article, I believe this redirect would be better targeting a non-fictional target: retarget to North Takoma station or weak retarget to North Tacoma, Tacoma, Washington. Otherwise, disambiguation may be necessary. Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate as no primary topic – North Takoma station is an acceptable partial title match, and I don't think a briefly-mentioned fictional place is likely to be primary over a real station with its own article. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Methodist High School

This redirect was created by moving Methodist High School, Kanpur away from the title, but I really don't think the primary topic of "Methodist High School" is this one particular Methodist high school. (One could argue that it's WP:DIFFCAPS, but I'm not sure.) The best target I can find for the general concept of Methodist high schools is Christian school § Methodist, but it's a very short section that doesn't mention high schools in particular. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to DAB page - looks like there's a lot of schools that have similar names with articles, and the Kanpur school is not the primary topic here. BugGhost🦗👻 13:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Studios

"Universal Studios" is typically used to refer to either Universal Pictures, the film studio (as a nickname/former name), or the various theme parks around the globe named "Universal Studios" that are operated by Universal Destinations & Experiences. The parent company of both divisions is also named Universal Studios, Inc., which is where universalstudios.com points to (versus universalpictures.com and universaldestinationsandexperiences.com). Universal Studios currently redirects to Universal Studios, Inc., making it an unnecessary disambiguation, but a recent RM ended with no consensus for a move. Previously, the redirect pointed to Universal Pictures. I'm not convinced a primary topic can be determined here, given the two- or three-way split, so I would call for turning this redirect into a disambiguation page. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:45, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Best case I can present here is that the number of monthly pageviews Universal Pictures receives dwarfs every other Wikipedia article covering some aspect of the company. Outside of Wikipedia, it's much of the same. When you visit the main company's website, the film IP is front and center. When you visit their theme parks, film is front and center there too. Marketing? Yep, still front and center. The entire company revolves around (and depends on) it's film intellectual property, despite having a presence in other areas. Clearly, "Universal Studios" is a term that is most closely associated with the motion picture division of the company. The only other real competition here is Universal Destinations & Experiences, but per WP:DISAMBIG#Deciding to disambiguate, we simply place that in a hatnote like it is currently at Universal Pictures. If someone really feels a disambig page is necessary, we can add that to the hatnote as well. Simple.
BTW, even if the result is no consensus, the redirect should revert back to its former target, Universal Pictures. There doesn't appear to be consensus for that change either. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll preface this by saying that consensus is presumed unless reverted, so we do have four months worth of implicit consensus for Universal Studios' current target, and many years worth of implicit consensus for Universal Pictures' current title.
Now, let me present a counterargument. If you look up "Universal Studios" on any search engine, depending on where you are located, you'll most likely see results for the theme park closest to you. For me, it's Universal Studios Hollywood, but you might get Universal Studios Florida, Universal Studios Japan, Universal Studios Singapore, or Universal Studios Beijing. What you likely will not see is Universal Pictures, the film studio, because the word "Studios" does not appear anywhere in the name "Universal Pictures"; it's simply being used as a shorthand or nickname. If you look at sources that discuss the film studio and theme parks, most use "Universal Pictures" to refer to the studio and "Universal Studios _____" to refer to the parks. I don't dispute the fact that Universal Pictures is more notable/important/popular than Universal Studios (the theme parks), but what's the evidence that readers are likely looking for Universal Pictures (a non-title match) rather than the many other pages whose title contains "Universal Studios" when they search the latter term? InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"consensus is presumed unless reverted" – I know you know I'm a longtime editor (15 years in fact), so you don't need to explain implicit consensus to me, probably just like I don't need to explain to you that it's also the weakest form of consensus that only exists UNTIL "disputed or reverted" (either qualifies). It should be clear I've disputed it, but even if that escaped your attention, did you already forget about this revert by Intrisit? Or how about this revert by 162 etc.? Perhaps I should also take a moment to point out that STATUSQUO is just an essay with zero bite, since you've used it as justification in one of those reverts.
"we do have four months worth...for Universal Studios' current target", "many years...for Universal Pictures current title" – Really? Prior to May, we had 7 years for Universal Studios → Universal Pictures! You can't see this in the immediate history, because the redirect was overwritten in December 2023 by a page move, but it had been like that for years following the 2017 technical move I linked above. 4 months doesn't hold a candle to 7 years, but regardless of the comparison here, presumed consensus is non-existent at this point. It's the same deal regarding the "Universal Pictures" article title. The article was previously titled "Universal Studios" for nearly 14 years, nearly double the amount of time it has been titled "Universal Pictures". Arguing in favor of recent presumed consensus while conveniently ignoring the previous presumed consensus that existed for a greater length of time doesn't make any sense. Your "preface" didn't do your counterargument any favors.
"If you look up "Universal Studios" on any search engine..." – I think it's time you move away from this notion of relying on a basic web search for the premise of your argument. You did this in the previous discussion, and I showed back then (as I'll do now) that these are misleading arguments to bring to the table without proper context. The problem with using Google in the manner you are doing so now is that the "top hits" are tailored to advertising. SEO marketers exploit weaknesses in Google's search algorithms, such as PageRank, to game the system and push to the top of search result rankings. The problem continues to get worse each year, despite improvements made by Google and competing search engines. What you are witnessing in the results is bias; a bias toward marketing/selling/advertising. A better test would be to use Google Books, search on "Universal Studios" in quotes, and then on the results page, refine the results by using the dropdown "Any document" and selecting "Books" only (IMO, the other formats are more likely to cover travel and leisure in the form of advertising, skewing the results). Now what you'll find is that the first page is 4 hits movie studio, 6 theme park. There are some Econoguide and other travel-type publication hits on the next couple pages that favor theme parks, but from page 4 through page 10, the hits are predominantly the movie studio, and by a wide margin. I didn't spend time digging beyond that, but feel free, as this is a more reliable result that holds more weight. Do you find that interesting? I certainly did.
In any case, this may not be the so-called evidence required, and a disambig page is still an acceptable alternative, but let's not pretend that the recent change to the redirect back in May has any kind of standing consensus. Should this discussion end in no consensus, you can bet I'll be reverting that change. --GoneIn60 (talk) 10:29, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I recognize implicit consensus is a weak form of consensus; I was addressing your previous statement that there was "no consensus" for the redirect's current target and Universal Pictures' article title — this is not accurate, although there may be stronger consensus for an alternative.
14 years and Google Books are because Universal Pictures used to be known as Universal Studios, not because Universal Studios is currently the common name for Universal Pictures. My search engine example was an effort to put ourselves in readers' shoes and surface what they are most likely looking for. As I noted in the RM, I agree it's not perfect, but it still shouldn't be entirely discarded. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"there was "no consensus" for the redirect's current target...this is not accurate" – My statement is entirely accurate, and either you don't seem to fully understand the concept, or you have misinterpreted my statement. Presumed consensus did exist from the time the redirect was changed in May up until the time the recent RM discussion was underway. But it disappeared, poof, vanished, during that discussion as soon as it became obvious that editors disputed the May redirect change. This is why presumed consensus is not worth spending so much time dwelling over or using as a basis for an argument; it is extremely weak. Consensus through editing is no longer presumed when disagreement becomes apparent. As for Universal Pictures, I assume you're referring to the "undiscussed" move comment I made about never getting the discussion it deserved, but I never mention "consensus". You may want to start using quotes to make sure you're getting it right.
"Universal Pictures used to be known as Universal Studios" – I am not following this logic at all in how this relates to 14 years on Wikipedia. Are you trying to draw a correlation between the two that is factual, or just sharing an opinion? Google Books is something concrete we can look at and take into consideration. You're welcome to contribute something as well. The web search, however, is the opposite: flawed and uninformative.
There is also another angle to consider that I pointed out in the RM discussion (which BTW you seem to be avoiding). The pageviews count (1) at Universal Studios, Inc. shot up drastically following the redirect change, which comes as no surprise since we all pretty much agree the redirect change was the wrong move. This is just more supporting evidence of that. It's worth seeing that first and then comparing the pageviews count (2) at the former target, Universal Pictures, you'll notice the 8k+ dropoff that could have happened didn't really happen. A little fluctuation, but not much. The article's traffic essentially holds steady. This implies that Universal Pictures was likely to get that traffic regardless. Kind of an important aspect to consider as well in addition to Google Books and the other points made. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how accurate this is, but according to Universal Pictures' infobox, it was formerly named Universal Studios, so I assumed this is why the Wikipedia article was only moved in 2017 and why some Google Books results use "Universal Studios". If the infobox is wrong, please correct me. Yes, I was referring to your comment on the "undiscussed technical move" of Universal Pictures, and perhaps I shouldn't have paraphrased that as "no consensus", but it seems you were implying that the undiscussed technical move indicates an absence of consensus for the current title.
Regarding the pageviews argument, I no longer claim that Universal Studios, Inc. is the primary topic for "Universal Studios", so I don't contest that Universal Studios should not point to Universal Studios, Inc. I am calling for it to be disambiguated because I don't think Universal Pictures is more "primary" than Universal Studios Hollywood, Universal Studios Florida, et al.
Interestingly, my Google Books results look different than yours. My first page yielded similar results, but pages 4–10 actually had mainly results for the theme parks. Perhaps more telling is that most results for the film studio pertain to the studio's "classic films" (typically the monster movies), i.e. when the studio was (presumably) named Universal Studios. These results were more or less identical when signed out in an incognito tab, so I'm not sure why you got such drastically different results. In any case, while I still don't think we should discard "regular" search entirely (this is how most of our readers navigate the web, not through Google Books or Google Scholar), I took a look at Google Scholar, and the results are similar to Google Books: 5 about the theme parks, 1 about the parent company (hmm, interesting), 3 about the film studio, and somehow the Masterminds production notes ended up on the first page. Second page onward are predominantly about the theme parks, with some monster movies sprinkled in. Google News is virtually all about the theme parks. Are you getting similar results? InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"it seems you were implying that the undiscussed technical move indicates..." – Nope, simply saying it didn't get the discussion it deserved, full stop. In that discussion, we would have found out if it had consensus. I'm not claiming to know what the outcome would have definitely been.
"I don't know how accurate this is, but ... it was formerly named Universal Studios" – Company infoboxes, especially when they're collapsed like that, rarely get the attention they need to be accurate. This one has an entry for 1996–2014 that is conflating the company with the motion picture division (you can read this in the body), which actually demonstrates the point I'm trying to make! "Universal Studios" is often used interchangeably to refer to "Universal Pictures". People often do this. Books often do this. Editors on Wikipedia apparently do this (thanks for the example). Just another real-world example of why it's harmless for the redirect to point here.
You're missing the point about the the pageviews data. I already acknowledged we all agree about the parent company. This is what you need to focus on. More than 8,000 monthly hits at that redirect (people navigating to "Universal Studios") were taken away from Universal Pictures, yet this went nearly undetected in the average monthly views on that page. The traffic there essentially stays the same. I don't think we can ignore something like that.
"...when the studio was (presumably) named Universal Studios" – So here's what's going to happen. I'm going to explain this, and you are going to move onto the next perceived flaw you can find and see what you can expose. But nevertheless, the company originally opened as Universal City Studios in 1915. Its film division has always to some extent been known as Universal Pictures (there may have been a "Company" tacked on at one point in the mid 20th century). But what you'll notice is that there are books, newspapers, and magazines published from the 1920s all the way through the 2010s that still state "Universal Studios" when casually referring to either the company or the film studio. Interestingly, even from the very beginning, they preferred to drop "City" from the name in publications. Also, it didn't seem too important to distinguish "Universal Pictures" from the main company name. Seems they were always viewed predominantly as one and the same.
That's my personal understanding based on how the terms are interchangeably tossed around in sources. Only in official business relations or documents (or on screen) is extra care seem to be given to "Universal Pictures", which doesn't make it the common name, nor does it necessarily make it a good article title. As for your Google Books results being different than mine, I'll re-run it and post a list of my results. I don't see why those would be different unless we are running the search differently. Google Scholar is fine, but I think Google News suffers from some of the same bias and should be discounted. It's not a good test for this particular topic/debate. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 21:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, let's say Universal Pictures is often referred to as "Universal Studios" by academic sources (I take issue with this assertion and ignoring other types of sources, but I'm just going to WP:LETITGO and move on at this point). For the sake of argument, let's suppose that the use of "Universal Studios" to refer to the studio is just as common as using "Universal Pictures", which is the name seen in the opening credits of virtually all Universal pictures and therefore recognizable to most readers. But how does this show that the use of "Universal Studios" to refer to the film studio is substantially more common than the use of "Universal Studios" to refer to the theme parks of the same name? The pageviews argument is interesting, but I think we have convincing evidence that it is also very common to use "Universal Studios" to refer to ... well, Universal Studios. If the parks weren't named "Universal Studios", that would be a different story. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm back after stepping away for off-wiki commitments. At this point, the lack of participation from new editors (aside from 2pou) indicates this debate has run its course. I'm actually surprised it's still open, but I will close with this...
Your observation "the name seen in the opening credits of virtually all Universal pictures" relies on non-independent, primary sources. I'm sure you're aware from other discussions that when COMMONNAME is invoked, we seek out prevalence in independent sources. We wouldn't treat a primary topic redirect any differently.
The pageviews argument is just one of several angles given, along with Google Books (despite our experiences diverging in this RfD, which may need further exploration down the road). Then there's the WikiNav data explored below illustrating that guests searching for "Universal Studios" are not immediately jumping to theme park articles as you would expect after landing in the wrong article. The hatnote is right there at the top, front and center, and this might be the most convincing data to date (though you may find a reason to doubt it as well if you are beyond convincing, but if that's the case, why bother debating?). Redirecting to a disambig page isn't the end of the world. Not terrible, not great, not really optimal, but fine for now. -- GoneIn60 (talk) 08:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also back after a few days of absence. The portion of my quote you left out is important: the name seen in the opening credits of virtually all Universal pictures and therefore recognizable to most readers (emphasis added). I brought this up because anyone who has seen a Universal picture in the last few decades will likely remember reading "Universal Pictures presents" in front of every film. They won't recall hearing "Universal Studios" anywhere other than (possibly) common parlance or the theme parks ("We're going to Universal Studios!"). This is not advocating for simply adhering to the WP:OFFICIALNAME, I'm making the case that it is the common name precisely because general audiences are so widely exposed to use of the official name. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Just a preemptive apology to the closer for continuing this very long RfD. The following points need to be made, despite that this round of debate appears to be headed to disambiguation (an acceptable option).
2pou: Glad you jumped in and brought up WikiNav. That's where I was going next before getting sucked into off-Wiki commitments. First, I should clarify that I wasn't arguing that Universal Pictures depended solely on traffic from the redirect. This page gets over 100k monthly views, and the redirect is only responsible for approx 6-7k views. My point was that in the 4-month period following the redirect change, its monthly view count remained fairly steady. There was some fluctuation, but not enough to match what the redirect consistently brought to the table. Is it possible that incoming traffic from other sources saw an uptick during the same timeframe? Sure, it's possible, but it's also unlikely.
So getting back to WikiNav data... You were on the right track, except we should be evaluating the redirect target "Universal Studios, Inc.", which is where people land when searching for "Universal Studios". This is a point of interest, because in earlier discussion we've concluded that "Universal Studios, Inc." fails as the primary topic. We'd like to get a glimpse of where outgoing traffic is headed. In theory, there should be a significant number landing there unexpectedly, leading to some portion of outgoing pageviews headed toward other "Universal Studios" articles. So what does the WikiNav data reveal? Universal Pictures is the #2 hit with 1,520 targets, and none of the theme park articles are in the top 10...Wow! In fact, you have to expand the top 20 just to see one, where you'll also see a partial title match named "Universal Animation Studios" ranked at #12 (151 targets). "Universal Studios Hollywood" sits at #17 (62 targets), and "Universal Studios Florida" sits at #19 (56 targets). They're barely a blip on the radar in comparison. The page gets a total of 14k monthly views, which as we discussed above owes a big chunk to the redirect (6k+ redirected hits per month) that changed in May. These two sets of numbers can help us draw a pretty reliable conclusion.
Even more interesting to me is that the very first link in the article appears in the hatnote which reads, "For the theme parks, see Universal Destinations & Experiences", yet it doesn't even register in the top 20 for outgoing traffic! For all this talk about the theme parks being one of the intended targets for those searching "Universal Studios", that doesn't appear to hold any weight whatsoever according to the WikiNav outgoing data. Something should be registering out of thousands of redirects, but we aren't seeing anything. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC) (updated 16:06, 7 October 2024 (UTC))[reply]
@GoneIn60: Sorry; I didn't mean to suggest you were relying solely on traffic. I understood that, I just wanted to make sure we don't just look at the number it spits out without considering those factors because it was going to be a very high number regardless. I did look at the Universal Studios, Inc. clickstream, and I, too, found it interesting that it didn't funnel people to any parks. I was discussing the Universal Pictures info because I was looking closer at the long-term history before the redirect was retargeted. While I think the data for Universal Studios, Inc. was interesting, I'm seeing that the data is a bit older. It says the data was dumped in August 2024, so it hasn't actually captured the incoming/outgoing traffic since the retargeting on September 10. Overall, I do lean towards disambiguation due to the sheer number of options, but I do agree that if it were to remain a redirect, Universal Pictures is the better option. Several articles for older films, actors, actresses, directors, etc. link there intending the (now) Universal Pictures page. (Yes, that can be resolved via clerical edits...)
I didn't realize until now that Universal Studios, Inc. was only "created" (via a split and move of sorts by HeroWikia - legacy company still captured at MCA_Inc.) in April this year. -2pou (talk) 18:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2pou, unless I'm missing something, this all goes back to the redirect change made in May by MinionsFan1998. So the data in August 2024 would be a valid date range to assess.
As for a disambiguation page, I don't disagree there needs to be one. However, I disagree the title of it needs to be "Universal Studios"; instead it should be Universal Studios (disambiguation). We can link to it in a hatnote at Universal Pictures, a common practice described at WP:DISAMBIG#Deciding to disambiguate (and also something I mentioned in my original !vote). Then restore the redirect to its original target (Universal Pictures) based on the evidence provided. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you're right. I didn't go back through the history far enough when I saw the 10Sep retarget. Thanks for pointing that out.
I don't have super strong feelings about where the dab page goes, but I do have doubts in having Universal Studios, Inc. as the target. -2pou (talk) 00:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I'm with you about the current target. It's the least qualified for sure. My concern with having the redirect go to a DAB page right off the bat, is that there will be quite a bit of work needed to resolve the issues it creates. There appears to be 3,862 Wikilinks from articles using the redirect, and when you look at a lot of those links, they were created with the intention of directing readers to Universal Pictures.
Here's one random example I checked from the list...Piper Laurie. Just read the opening of the Career section and this source (the latter of which was inserted by one of our great copyeditors who sadly is no longer with us). "Universal Studios" is being used in the context of the film studio. We could potentially see many hundreds, if not thousands of these links now land on a DAB page unnecessarily.
We are left with three options:
  1. Keep as is – Worst one. Universal Studios, Inc. is essentially the history of "Music Corporation of America", how it came to be, its 1962 buyout of Universal, and everything post-buyout. Many who land here will be confused, as they expect to be reading about Universal's history.
  2. Retarget to DAB – Better, but far from perfect. Retargeting here will essentially break a lot of these older links that were meant for "Universal Pictures", forcing readers to make an extra hop (and to choose correctly). It will also create the most work moving forward to manually update and correct these links down the road.
  3. Restore original target → Universal Pictures – Best by far given the # of Wikilinks, along with WikiNAV data on the topic phrase "Universal Studios". In addition, we have some loose off-Wiki data from Google Books that seems to support long-term significance in favor of the film studio (theme parks compete but do not overtake the film studio in this space).
Knowing what you know now, 2pou, are you still split between options 2 and 3, or do you have a preference between them? -- GoneIn60 (talk) 05:11, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GoneIn60: The "Retargeting [to the disambiguation page] will essentially break a lot of these older links that were meant for "Universal Pictures", forcing readers to make an extra hop (and to choose correctly)" will not be a concern if this redirect is disambiguated, considering an internal Wikipedia project page, WP:DPL, encourages editors to disambiguate links that link to or point to disambiguation pages, and there are several editors who work on this. Seriously, if there is one aspect of Wikipedia I have seen consistent over the past 10+ years, other than article creation, it is the plethora of editors ready to disambiguate links. Steel1943 (talk) 01:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even more interesting to me is that the very first link in the article appears in the hatnote which reads, "For the theme parks, see Universal Destinations & Experiences", yet it doesn't even register in the top 20 for outgoing traffic! The hatnotes (on both Universal Studios, Inc. and Universal Pictures) are new and were added by me on the day I opened the RM that preceded this one. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
InfiniteNexus, thanks for pointing that out. I did not catch that in the history. Looks like you added the hatnote on August 31, and I like how you placed both options in there (the main theme parks article and the film studio article). Hopefully we'll get a chance to see WikiNav update soon to show September's data. Its clickstream data dump usually drops in the first few days of the following month, and from what I gather, this is usually processed and displayed about a week later on the 12th. We'll know shortly if the theme park company link in the hatnote became a factor in September.
It's also worth noting a few things. Using the "Search" box to jump to your next destination will still be tracked by WikiNav in outgoing traffic. Even without the hatnote, WikiNav would have still been capturing searches from that page. So for Universal theme park seekers getting their searches right on the 2nd try (by being more specific), we would have seen that in the August data. So I'm a bit skeptical we'll see a huge difference, but we'll see. In addition, the version of the article heading into August did contain Universal theme park links in the Takeover section as well as in the navbox at the bottom. To be fair, "Universal Pictures" was more prominent, appearing one section earlier and also in the infobox. GoneIn60 (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:49, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MrBro

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Awantipora

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Diffusion semigroup

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Year of Science

This is not the only "Year of Science" in existence, and such an WP:XNR can be confusing. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:14, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 01:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Alston

The target article mentions John Alston a single time, with no further information on Alston as a subject beyond his being an early colonist of Victoria. John Alston could conceivably be turned into its own page, or if not sufficiently notable, given a full section on tactile alphabet. That section could make mention of his being an early Victorian colonist. I propose deletion of the redirect altogether. While retargeting it to tactile alphabet would be better than the current target (especially if given his own section), as is, it wouldn't necessarily be better than the current redirect. Notably, of a random sampling of the colonists listed on The Explorers and Early Colonists of Victoria, I didn't find others that redirected there (or at all); there's no indication why John Alston has special treatment here. In favour of changing the redirect: Alston is one of 713 colonists in the photograph, whereas he is one of 9 names mentioned in the list of tactile alphabets based on roman letters. At least in terms of proportion, he seems more notable as a tactile alphabet inventor than as an early colonist of Victoria. Sarayourfriend (talk) 00:47, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After reading other discussions about redirects (my first time delving into this part of Wikipedia), I think what I've touched on above is WP:XY and it's best to just delete the redirect. Whether Alston is more notable as a tactile alphabet creator or for his presence in the Early Colonists of Victoria photograph is ambiguous, retargeting the redirect is meaningless if neither page goes into more than a single detail about him regardless. Sarayourfriend (talk) 01:08, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


October 8

The Red Palace

Thanks to the "The", a book The Red Palace is the primary topic for this title, so this seems like a WP:REDYES WP:PLA situation. Cremastra (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 01:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup/Ada Lovelace Edit-a-thon 2024 Cornell

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of Grand Theft Auto Advance characters

No such list or section at target. However, Grand Theft Auto Advance#Setting and characters does exist, but it does not contain a list of characters. (List of Grand Theft Auto Advance characters is a {{R with history}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Czar since they WP:BLARed List of Grand Theft Auto Advance characters in 2015 [46]. Steel1943 (talk) 12:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Restore article? Or simply refine to the "Settings and characters" section of the current target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree with Jay in that there is no list; someone using this redirect-- which would require someone looking for a list-- would be WP:ASTONISHed to find themselves here. Thus, I disagree with the idea that retaining this redirect is a good idea. I also question the idea of renaming these redirects, given WP:MOVEREDIRECT. Is the history of this page truly important enough to keep that we should rename the redirect in order to prevent it going away when the redirect is deleted, given the extremely low likelihood of it being brought back to a proper article (given its unsourced and non-notable nature)? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete. not present, history had no sources cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Predictions of the end of Facebook

If a reader typing predictions of t into the search bar (after seeing such an article for Google or Wikipedia) stumbles upon a page like Predictions of the end of X which redirects to X social media platform, they may be given the potentially false impression that the article on X may contain information about such predictions and may end up wasting their time scrolling through the article only to potentially conclude that no such information may be present. Sure, they were "merged" into their respective articles, but their poor usefulness is still a problem. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 04:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kid Speedy

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:Highlights

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Draft:Engineering

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

First Americans

Hm. First American only links Indigenous peoples of the Americas, though maybe should link Peopling of the Americas as well; if not, then the plural "First Americans" should be considered unambiguous given the other disambiguation page entries. The last redirect points at a series of historical fiction books, which is probably not the primary topic. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:55, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese opera

Suggest deletion: the target article does not mention opera. The topic of Japanese opera is likely a notable one and this should be red link per WP:RED Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As-is, this redirect is incredibly confusing: it brings the unsuspecting reader to a page that says nothing about opera. That said, what did the searcher expect to find? An opera company or theater in Japan? An opera written by a Japanese composer? A native Japanese opera-like theater genre? Garbage in, garbage out, we should not answer an open-ended question with a random response or even a collection of these. Викидим (talk) 19:46, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what they would have expected to find is presumably something fitting in Category:Opera by country. So maybe garbage out, but definitely not garbage in. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that this interpretation is the most plausible. Alas, we do not have a text similar to French Opera. Викидим (talk) 20:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Baba Saheb Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology

R with history. No mention of Baba Saheb, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar College of Agricultural Engineering and Technology at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:18, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:58, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All-Star Batman

Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Shady Sheehy

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete.

Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon Red (plus that other one)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Alicia Douvall

A redirect here is not appropriate as it could also redirect to Celebrity Love Island. I vote to delete the redirect to encourage article creation. Launchballer 16:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:32, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Democracy Index

I'm not sure how primary the Economist index is for the title-case name, but these should point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(2) Democrasy Index: This is an almost pointless redirect. It has had 2 views in the last 30 days (compared to 9,892 for Democracy Index. I therefore don't think it matters a lot what happens to it. However, "Democrasy Index", unlike "Democracy Index", is not contained in the title of any particular index, so there isn't any particular index with any claim to be a primary meaning. There's also a case for saying that in the absence of a strong reason for doing otherwise it's better to leave it where it is, because someone somewhere may expect it to be there, though in this case that's an extremely weak case. My conclusion is that, as I said above, it doesn't matter a lot what happens to this redirect, but on balance I just about prefer leaving it where it is.
(3) I don't find the argument that the redirects should both point to the same target convincing at all. There's no reason why what happens if someone searches for one title should be influenced by what would have happened if they had searched for the other.
WP:TLDR abbreviated version: Keep them both as they are. JBW (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tighten

let's try this again... closed before with no consensus, with votes torn between... everything, really. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

for the record, my vote will be to retarget to tight cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate. Per WP:SSRT, only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects (emphases mine). This word is neither commonly wikified (indeed, there are no mainspace links that point to it), nor has it been repeatedly recreated. But because it might reasonably be a search term for multiple items on Wikipedia, and none seem like an easy primary topic, a dab page should suffice. My view has not changed since the prior discussion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I acknowledge I was pinged. Steel1943 (talk) 23:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in with a Delete vote, although I'm okay with both the idea of retargeting or hatnoting to Tight. Either way, this shouldn't stay as-is, for the extremely simple fact that anyone looking for the extremely common English verb would be heavily astonished to find themselves here-- I struggle to think of a way that Megamind, the movie, is more notable than the English language word that it references as a joke. If we stay at Megamind, it needs a hatnote. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naoki Tanisaki

This redirect is unnecessary and misleading as this alternative name stems from a misunderstanding of Japanese spelling. When Onodera impersonated Naoki Tanizaki, he used a different kanji spelling for his name; it didn't change the way the name wad read and shouldn't change how it's transcribed. MordecaiXLII (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vote to retarget the redirect Naoki Tanisaki → Naoki Tanizaki, per common mispellings under WP:POFR, which includes "Likely misspellings" as reasons to create redirects. The Kanji 崎 and 嵜 are both read as "さき" (saki), anyway, so it should be categorized as a possible mispelling for Tanizaki.
I do agree with the nom that there is no reason for it to be redirecting to T-Hawk (wrestler), though. MetropolitanIC (💬|📝) 03:51, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of swears

No such list at the target; we shouldn't suggest readers that we do. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I'd normally recommend deletion... would it be a bad idea to simply redirect to Seven Dirty Words? It's not a list of literally all English-language profanity, but it is at least a list of some profanity. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would not be a good redirect, as that list is significantly narrower than the search term - for example it omits all non-English swear words (of which we have multiple lists). Thryduulf (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is why I still advocate for creating a list of lists... since we do have all those lists. Fieari (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree there is scope for some sort of list of lists, and nothing in this RfD prevents an editor from creating one, but the title of that list of lists wouldn't be "List of swears". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ansem

weird case, bordering on nonsensical. read at your own risk, this is the most simple and clean way i can possibly put it. "ansem" refers to two characters in kingdom hearts. one is a nerd who likes cosplaying as a mummy, listed here, and the other is a xehanort who stole the name because boys will be boys i guess. the xehanort seems to be the primary topic (if only because he popped up first and is hotter), but not by much, and kh discourse pretty often disambiguates things by referring to the latter as "ansem, (the) seeker of darkness" (or sod) and the former as "ansem the wise". this title has previously been used for redirects for both ansems and a dab for... both ansems (plus two people who were mistaken for an ansem for a few seconds each). opinions on... really, anything? cogsan (χ-BLADE!) (ouchie ouch) 17:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep and add hatnote or retarget to list of KH characters?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Häxans förbannelser

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Towel Trick

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

3RL

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:VB

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Wikipedia:VB

Rabila railway station

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Obstipation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Obstipation

Alison Chabloz

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Cards Against Disney

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Enigmatic Man

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mr. Bland

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Affine cone

Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Rio Este (desambiguacion)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Gedko Powało

This is a spelling mistake: proper name for the article is Gedko Sasinowic, proper name for the redirect ist Gedko Powała. My request for a speed deletion was reverted [49] Herzog von Teschen (talk) 19:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundling Gedko Powalo into the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 06:00, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vocational education and training centers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Vocational education and training centers

King Roland

Either disambiguate or redirect to List of Sofia the First characters, and target Roland I and Roland II to it, and Minimus is likely mentioned in the nominated target page. Also, I drafted Minimus (disambiguation), but it needs an improvement for the horse character. 88.235.230.49 (talk) 07:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Four targets have been proposed by participants. Retarget to any one of them, or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:03, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shiro sAGISU

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shamrock Airport

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Shamrock Airport

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur

Template:Lang1

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Banana Guard

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Banapassport

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Billy Rowan

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Charlotte Bishop

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Decco Bishop

No entry at the target page, only appears within a reference. Nothing really encyclopedic about this person. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:56, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay: Thanks for the tip on the mention; imo that's still WP:SURPRISEing though (at the Fair City subsection), especially if the material changes and the mention disappears, then we'll be left with an unhelpful redirect while that occurs. If people are searching for a character, I'd think they'd expect to end up at a list of characters. This still feels niche enough to delete as the character appears to be exceedingly minor from what I'm seeing. Can always be recreated if there's an entry that gets created later. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:11, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BlockParty (game portal)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Boussh

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Burin en-bec-de-flute

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

January 1, 2003

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep


October 7

IMAX theatre at iSQUARE

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

2001 attacks

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#2001 attacks

Hall Airport

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Hall Airport

Pizzaface

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Pizzaface

Everitt E Boat

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Boston's best variety

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

20 Years of Noise 1985–2005

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Ashchf Lshtshfum

No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Geoffrey Chalmers

Name not mentioned at target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone willing to take a dive into the sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tay Keith, fuck these niggas up!

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Donald Trump as rhetorician

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

FZDO

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Aero blue

There is no mention of Aero blue in the target page. ... discospinster talk 16:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It existed when the redirect was created (see [51]), though it was un-cited and a fairly poor description, and the also see seems to point to a fairly different color, so it's not surprising if someone deleted that section (and forgot to look for redirects to it) in the intervening 11 years. :) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That version linked to Air Force blue, which also does not mention "Aero blue" currently. Plus it's azure, not cyan! So changing the redirect won't help. ... discospinster talk 20:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try. The mention at the target was removed — can it be restored with a source? Any other possible target articles?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wpedia

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Wpedia

October 6

Scared Shitless

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ø (Disambiguation) (disambiguation)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

William B. Cox

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Rush Limbaugh/Chicom

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Britney Spears 7th studio album (Britney Spears album)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:MBTI Instrument

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: restore templates

Minister for Cities

Not sure if this is the best target as Minister for Cities (Australia) exists - also not sure if that is the best title for that article either. I'm not familiar with the recent political cabinet reshuffling so there might be content forking between the current target and Minister for Cities (Australia). Fork99 (talk) 02:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Minister for Cities (Australia) since that article is no longer a redirect in and of itself. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 02:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When I created the redirect (Minister for Cities), I wasn't aware that the Minister for Cities (Australia) page existed already. In that case, I am happy for the redirect to be deleted straight up or redirect to Minister for Cities (Australia). Marcnut1996 (talk) 03:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree – if that's the primary topic, it should be moved to the title "Minister for Cities", and if it's not the primary topic then "Minister for Cities" shouldn't redirect there. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Opinions seems split between creating a disambiguation page at the base title, or claiming Minister for Cities (Australia) is the primary topic. (Either way, seems a disambiguation page needs to be created somewhere ... but is that "somewhere" the base title or a title ending with "(disambiguation)"?)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the September 16 log no longer shows up at the main RfD page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:20, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

British Music Invasion

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

List over Swedish Artists by Albums and Singles Sold

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of Dota 2 heroes

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Online education

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#Online education

Footman Frenzy

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

26, November, 2006

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#26, November, 2006

January 3, 2003

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Undermine (Warcraft)

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:21, 26 August 2024 (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) 14:34, 4 September 2024 (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) 19:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

===Undermine===
The Undermine is believed to be the home island of the goblins, and is ruled by the Goblin Princes of Trade who hold their slave pens and palaces there. Undermine exists partially on the world's surface, but most of it is underground. It is primarily a series of volcanic caverns, tunnels and chambers that span out of the Isle of Kezan through the ocean floor, connecting to adjacent smaller islands to the west. Aside from the goblins and their slaves, the tunnels are also inhabited by a strange breed of purple-skinned goblins named hobgoblins. They are larger than regular goblins and they rarely live to three years of age. They were created by alchemical experiments on goblin subjects during the Second War.
The goblin capital is Undermine, a city beneath the surface of the island of Kezan. As of December 2008, Kezan has not been included in any game in the Warcraft series.
The majority of media in the Warcraft universe takes place upon a planet called Azeroth. This planet has threefour continents, named the Eastern Kingdoms, Kalimdor, Northrend (the world's polar cap) and Undermine (considered home land of the Goblins)...
The goblin capital is Undermine, a city beneath the surface of the island of Kezan. As of March 2009, Kezan has not been included in any game in the Warcraft series. Goblins are a neutral, mercantile race based in the underground city of Undermine.
The Goblin continent of Undermine, has yet to be visited in any entry of the Warcraft series.
Azeroth has four three known continents... Two other major islands are Kezan (where the Goblin city Undermine is located, introduced in WoW:Cataclysm) and Zandalari
Goblins are a neutral, mercantile race based in the underground city of Undermine. the various goblin business cartels based out of the city of Undermine now supply both factions, though they have closer ties with the Horde.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist to finally close the September 12 log.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:33, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Texvc

Legacy cruft does not warrant a double soft redirect from mainspace. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:32, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feel status minus Actual status Inconsistency

not mentioned at target (in over 10 years) seems to be created for listing at dab FAI as the only user, but I'm removing that dab entry as it fails WP:DABACRO and wouldn't be used anyway due to incorrect capitalisation. Widefox; talk 20:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's an index [52], that could indeed be listed at FAI. The capitalisation *seems* to be correct, although I'm not sure why the authors chose to capitalise it this way. In other sources [53] [54], sentence case seems to be preferred. I don't think there's enough information to write an article, but it might merit a mention at the target. Cremastra (talk) 20:24, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies already for the wall-of-text input:
The term (with same sort-of-dopey captialization) was indeed added in 2014 (by the redirect's creator) and still present up until a reworking in late July 2021. I have taken the liberty of re-adding the mention, as I discern no reason for its removal (made by an editor inactive since 2023). Per Cremestra and the mention in several papers, it seems notable enough for a mention at the target as well as the FAI dab page.
I'm dubious as to the usefulness of the redirect due to its length, although it comes up nicely as the only choice when I type in "Feel status". However, if we keep it, I'd like to change the caps; although correctly matching the original 2014 paper's use, it's different on both the 2016 [2] and 2020 [3] papers mentioned by Cremestra. I personally prefer the last, from Social Science & Medicine, which uses hyphens, which seems (of the three styles) most easily understandable and conformant to English usage (and therefore what I used when restoring the text). In one paper's reviews Zaccagni (original paper's lead researcher) acknowledged a lack of facility with English (though the caps weren't explicitly mentioned); I don't know how much leeway we have in choosing a style. I do think it an unlikely capitalization for a WP user to type in, so I would lean toward Keep, but sentence-case it. It just looks wrong otherwise. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 20:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention has been added back to the target, but participants have been unsure about the capitalization of the redirect title.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:29, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Farage riots

Negative redirect not mentioned in the target article. A quick Google search doesn't seem to show that is a common term. Borderline speedy deletion candidate. -1ctinus📝🗨 00:11, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good day. I created this redirect not out of agreement with the term, but rather because I had seen the name used to refer to these riots frequently at the time on social medias and on some reliable (and less reliable) news sites, as Thryduulf found. The term is certainly biased, I do admit that I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies around redirects. My rationale was simply to help readers who may know these riots as the Farage Riots to get to the appropriate article.
Anyway, I understand your reason for proposing deletion. I personally do not have enough knowledge on the subject of the article to integrate mention of this nickname in a well written manner. Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, thank you for editing! Mittzy (talk) 13:11, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention has not yet been added to the target or to Nigel Farage. Notified of this discussion at the two pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grabage truck

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mick Armstrong

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Mick Armstrong

October 5

NeoCitran

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Relgion in the High Middle Ages

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: moved without redirect

National Sports Administration

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#National Sports Administration

Aušautas

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Diedievaite

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Aušlavis

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Karorius

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Whoopsie daisy

Not mentioned at target (except in the hatnote). No other words redirect to this target and there is no list of words here (except for a few examples in the Vocabulary section). Per this article, both words are variants of Upsy daisy, which is a redirect to In the Night Garden.... Johnj1995 (talk) 21:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target talk, In the Night Garden..., and Oopsy Daisy.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:48, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A new target has turned up after the last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:20, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders

Not mentioned at target. Otherwise, only appears to occur in references on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:19, 14 August 2024 (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) 14:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget? Dabify? Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:38, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Restore, a credible case for notability has been made below. -- Tavix (talk) 13:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-redirect page history of Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders in case there is support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:11, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and in the meantime, delete all (not anymore lmao cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)) per[reply]
  • wp:rfd#delete, criterion 2: the book and feminism in general are not mentioned in the article
  • wp:gng (feat. sigcov): from some looking, i haven't been able to find independent info on the book. only the book itself for sale on amazon and an article about fat feminism written in some indecipherable glyphs
  • wp:rfd#delete, criterion 10: admittedly dabbling in wishful thinking, but i don't think the book doesn't stand a chance of being notable someday, though that day isn't today
and delete the third one in particular as vague, as feminists might have perspectives at least one other thing (maybe even more) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore the book redirects to an article, from a search on ProQuest (google search is incredibly, incredibly bad at finding book reviews) the book has several reviews from various academic journals and passes WP:NBOOK. I have no opinion on the third one. I will add the sources if no one else wants to. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan thoughts? PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:30, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
show sauce pwease :3 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan i am unbelievably lazy and on my phone so i will be copying the proquest headings
  • Bookshelf -- Feminist perspectives on eating disorders edited by Patricia Fallon, Melanie A. Katzman and Susan C. Wooley ; London Vol. 344, Iss. 8932, (Nov 5, 1994): 1284.
  • Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders ; New York Vol. 26, Iss. 2, (Summer 1998): 242-243.
  • Book Reviews: Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders. Edited by Fallon, Patricia, Katzman, Melanie and Wooley, Susan. New York: Guilford Press. 1994. 465 pp. £25.00 (hb). ; London Vol. 166, Iss. 5, (May 1995): 692-693. DOI:10.1192/S0007125000074924
  • Books and resources -- Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders edited by Patricia Fallon, Melanie Katzman and Susan Wooley  ; Hettinger Vol. 8, Iss. 3, (May 1994): 57.
  • Book reviews -- Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders edited by Patricia Fallon, Melanie A. Katzman and Susan S. Wooley  ; Roslyn Heights Vol. 29, Iss. 115, (Fall 1994): 748.
  • Psychology -- Feminist perspectives on eating disorders edited by Patricia Fallon, Melanie A. Katzman and Susan C. Wooley ; Middletown Vol. 31, Iss. 10, (Jun 1994): 1658.
  • Book reviews -- Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders edited by P. Fallon, M. A. Katzman and S. C. Wooley ; Oxford Vol. 36, Iss. 6, (Sep 1995): 1098.
  • Uneasy embodiment -- Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders edited by Patricia Fallin, Melanie A. Katzman, and Susan C. Wooley / Understanding Eating Disorders edited by Leann Alexander-Mott and D. Barry Lumsden ; Cambridge Vol. 19, Iss. 2, (Jun 1995): 293.
All are reviews
This is just proquest. There are definitely more reviews, and NBOOK requires 2. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
then would putting this nom on hold until someone has the time (and proquest) to go through the reviews to write something around them be a good idea? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan I would do that but AFAIK I can't do anything to the redirect unless it is closed. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
drafting things during rfd time is standard practice. can't name examples of articles being drafted off the top of my head (yars rising might not count, the rfd templates were removed on the spot), but dabs are drafted all the time. thus, i'm 50% absolutely certain that drafting an article would be fine. on the off chance that this ends up not being the case, there's still no harm in a draft (as in a draftspace draft, not a "mainspace during xfd" draft, feel i should clarify that) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:43, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan voila. Not very comprehensive, there's a lot that can be mined from the reviews, but this says what the book covers and people's praise and criticism for it, which is a lot better than the old article, which said nothing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
haha yes cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
articleify parakanyaa's draft. no opinions in the "keeping the old edit history" department cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priestess of the Moon

Not mentioned at target. And not even correct if it were - Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos is the original use, and Tyrande Whisperwind before her article was BLARed would also have been reasonable. But none of those mention it either. Maybe retarget to Moon magic or Lunar deity as a last-ditch genericization, but that's well, grabbing desperately to see if anything sticks so I would just delete. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Lunar deity. There are some works that claim Priestess of the Moon as the protagonist. Ahri Boy (talk) 01:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems apropos per nom. IznoPublic (talk) 03:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Enheduanna who was (high) priestess of the moon (god). The only uses of the phrase on en.wp are in relation to her. Thryduulf (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The search results are almost all about the game character [64], in fact, I'm struggling to find anything not related to the game [65]. Leaning delete. If the capitalisation were different, I'd be more inclined to retarget, but it isn't, so I'm not. Cremastra (talk) 22:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget (where to?) or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 13:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget? Delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-BLAR page history in case there is support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:04, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Lunar deity, the actual page that Moon deity redirects to. We're not alleging that the lunar deity IS the priestess; we're alleging that a "priestess of the Moon" would likely worship one of the deities mentioned at Lunar deity, and thus, that the information presented at Moon deity is the most relevant information to the given search. It also serves as a bit of a disambiguator-- if the searcher wanted specifically a priestess of, say, Artemis, the Lunar deity page links to Artemis, where the reader can read about the arktoi at the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Angligena

No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Nerubian

Not mentioned at target. Mentioned once in passing at Mummy (undead) and at World of Warcraft: The War Within but neither of those have enough substance to support a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:08, 26 August 2024 (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) 14:35, 4 September 2024 (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) 19:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More options came up after the 2nd relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notional-functional syllabus

No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Esyllabus

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

AMA (Reddit)

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

The Physical Impossibility Of Dolphins In The Mind Of Someone Living

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

VVikipedia

No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

T:WPMHA

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 14#T:WPMHA

Big Yud

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Helen Justine Ferris

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

USS Dory (SS-352)

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Allan Cerda

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 11#Allan Cerda

Hérita N'Kongolo Ilunga

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

October 2

Symbolism (arts)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Symbolism (arts)

It's never lupus

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#It's never lupus

!(*$

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#!(*$

Muhajir Province

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Usurper King

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Usurper King

S-compact space

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#S-compact space

Tebasaki

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Tebasaki

HJE

Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Ingokho

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Chikkin

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Murgh

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Murgh

Ramlochan Vishwakarma (Sanwariya)

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Trial (TV series)

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sqecial relativity

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Special relativity (simplified)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Lightlike separation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Lightlike separation

Spacelike vector

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Spacelike vector

Missoes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Missoes

DcVD

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: restore article

Edward Johnson (footballer, born 1860)

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Soundtack for guitar hero world tour

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 9#Soundtack for guitar hero world tour

Jigarthanda (sountrack)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 10#Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack)

Soundracks and sountracks

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unmentioned Suikoden characters

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 16#Unmentioned Suikoden characters

YOU SUCK!

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget