User:Awesome Aasim/rfd rewrite

Copied from WP:RFD with few changes

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see Wikipedia:Deletion venues. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment.

XFD backlog

V	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Total
CfD	0	0	0	24	24
TfD	0	0	0	11	11
MfD	0	0	0	3	3
FfD	0	0	0	9	9
RfD	0	0	0	26	26
AfD	0	0	0	0	0

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.

• If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
• If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
• If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
• Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)

Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:

• Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
• Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
• Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.

The guiding principles of RfD

• The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
• Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
• If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
• Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
• RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
• Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
• In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.

When should we delete a redirect?

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes and Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving over a redirect

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

• a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
• if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").

Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.

Reasons for deleting

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):

1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, were an exception to this rule until they became their own namespace in 2024. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.

Reasons for not deleting

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

1. They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in article text because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
4. Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.

Neutrality of redirects

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).

How to list a redirect for discussion

STEP I.	Tag the redirect(s).   Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page. Please do not mark the edit as minor (m). Please include in the edit summary the phrase: Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]. Save the page ("Publish changes"). If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page. If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated.
STEP II.	List the entry on RfD.  Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries. Enter this text below the date heading: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~ For this template: Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=. Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=). Please use an edit summary such as: Nominating [[RedirectName]] (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating). To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~ If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template. If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.	Notify users.   It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template {{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~ may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]] Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

• Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.

Current list

November 24

A Night

• A Night → Rihanna#Discography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Since the now blocked sockpuppet TeapotsOfDoom nominated this redirect four days earlier and it was speedily kept per WP:BE, I'm reopening the discussion because I'm not really sure if it has a particular connection to Rihanna. The closest I could find via a Google search was part of the lyrics for "Goodnight Gotham" (which contains a sample of "Only If for a Night" by Florence and the Machine), but other than that, I'm not sure if it warrants a redirect to Rihanna's page, since 1) it's also part of the titles and/or lyrics for countless other songs and 2) it's a partial title match for multiple other articles and/or redirects (so I'm not sure where, if anywhere, is appropriate to retarget this). Delete this unless someone can provide a justification or a suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 05:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Male protagonist bingo

• Male protagonist bingo → Gender representation in video games#Portrayal of men  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unhelpful redirect that sounds a lot like the title of some Tumblr meme. Not relavent or mentioned in the article. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

RubRub

• RubRub → Geometry Dash#Pre-Geometry Dash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is what community members jokingly call the creator of this game so it's possible fancruft. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to Hamtaro: Ham-Ham Heartbreak where a different topic by this name is mentioned -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete This is a niche term, so anyone knowing this nickname probably knows the proper name as well. The mention at Hamtaro: Ham-Ham Heartbreak is so pitiful that it does not warrant a redirect. It would aso WP:ASTONISH readers. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:56, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete Per Ca. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Shen an calhar

• Shen an calhar → World of Warcraft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

How did this end up redirecting to WoW? Apparently, this somehow got redirected to the wrong franchise. Slight research shows that it's supposed to be from Wheel of Time. That being said, there doesn't seem to be a mention on that on there either. It appears that "The Band of the Red Hand" is a more common name for that in-universe group that the articles do mention. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to List of The Wheel of Time characters#Mat Cauthon, as that's also what Band of the Red Hand redirects to. Procyon117 (talk) 14:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment, upon further inspection, turns out it did originally redirect to the correct franchise, but was changed for an unknown reason. Could probably just be reverted back if you're not opposed to doing so. Procyon117 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Unless someone adds a mention at the proposed target. I don't see how anyone would benefit from this if it isn't mentioned anywhere. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 15:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per CycloneYoris. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to add a mention to the correct franchise?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Flag of North Yemen

• Flag of North Yemen → Flag of Yemen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ill make it an article just like how Flag of South Yemen is an article Abo Yemen✉ 11:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. Normally, I'd say retarget to North Yemen (which is incorrectly marked as a dab page, more on that in a moment), which has a picture of the flag. It's short enough to accommodate information about the flag there, and if a spinout is warranted, that can happen without discussion here. However, I notice that the nominator has recently converted it from a dab page to an article (without removing the dab template or adding any sources). I don't know a thing about the history of the region and have no idea if this was reasonable or not. I'd encourage others that might to take a closer look. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you make it an article, I'd say delete. CheeseyHead (talk) 02:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

ハンマーブロス

• ハンマーブロス → List of Mario franchise characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not helpful for the English encyclopedia. Appears to refer to the Hammer Bros. antagonists in the Mario franchise. TNstingray (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

weak refine to #enemy characters. yeah, that refers to hammer bros. mario is a japanese franchise (really japanese, even, have you seen how many tanuki they can cram into a single game?), so japanese redirects are fine and dandy, though this one isn't mentioned, so meh cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

PKS 1402-012

• PKS 1402-012 → Parkes Catalogue of Radio Sources  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This belongs on the target list, but is just one of 8000, and isn't mentioned there. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. This was an article which existed for a short time, but was then BLARed by the creator/sole substantive contributor, Galaxybeing. If GB gives the go-ahead, this could probably just be G7ed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

  oops, fixed ping for Galaxybeing 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 22:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep and tag with {{R with possibilities}}; I added PKS 1402-012 to the bulleted list at Parkes Catalogue of Radio Sources pulling a reference from the redirect page history that I thought was the most general (I didn't parse through those 33 references too thoroughly though). This doesn't quite satisfy WP:SELFRED, but there's enough in the page history to benefit another editor if this object becomes more notable. Should GalaxyBeing request deletion, I trust that decision. ― Synpath 20:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Ro (antigen)

• Ro (antigen) → Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Autoantigen Ro → Calreticulin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

We need an expert to determine if these are correctly targeted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep the first link, as the "Ro antigen" is mentioned there and I think this is the main article discussing it. Is there some controversy we're not aware of? For the second link, the Ro antigen is also a Ro autoantigen, that is, this is an autoimmune response. Hence, also Redirect "Autoantigen Ro" to Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies. Calreticulin was not a terrible target, but Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies is the more relevant target. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 11:44, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget both to Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies#Antigens where the Ro antigens are discussed thoroughly. The Calreticulin article states that it is proven to not be a Ro antigen. ― Synpath 14:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

In the spirit of consensus, redirect to the Antigens section is also a good outcome. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 18:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• keep per Mark viking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Indy HeroClix (heroclix)

• Indy HeroClix (heroclix) → HeroClix  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Inappropriate DAB formatting by listing it both inside and outside the parentheses. Delete as unhelpful redirect. If kept, please redirect to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series. TNstingray (talk) 18:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Yes, indeed, bring me to the page about a heroclix! Which one? The one that's a heroclix! This is a very implausible disambiguation attempt, and we don't need it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Move the non-insignificant edit history to Indy Clix (which seems to be the real name per Google searches) and retartget to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series as suggested. BOZ (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 04:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per above after moving page history or move without redirect to Indy Clix. Jay 💬 12:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Chingisid

• Chingisid → Borjigin#Genghisids  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Which articles should these redirects point to? The current situation is inconsistent and confusing.

1. Chingisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
2. Chingissid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
3. Chinggisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
4. Chinggisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
5. Chingissids does not exist yet.
6. Chinggissids does not exist yet.
7. Genghisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
8. Genghisid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
9. Chingizid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
10. Family tree of Genghis Khan redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan.
11. Jochid redirects to Jochi, but Jochids redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan. (Jochid Ulus redirects to Golden Horde, that seems fine).

Personally, I am in favour of redirecting them all to Descent from Genghis Khan, as a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid is, strictly speaking, a descendant from Genghis Khan, not an earlier Borjigin, while Genghis Khan himself was obviously not a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid, but a Borjigin only. Redirecting to a section always risks link rot anyway, as section titles often change or they are rearranged, while Descent from Genghis Khan as a whole will presumably always be dedicated to this very subject. Thoughts? NLeeuw (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

PS: Not sure if I formatted this RfD correctly; I rarely do these. Do I need to tag all redirects in question? NLeeuw (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Section redirects are useful in taking the reader straight to the relevent part of a large article. A link from Genghisids to Borjigin can confuse the reader, since the Borjigin article does mention Genghisids in the lead. Link rot can be reduced by linking to an anchor rather than a section name, e.g. {{anchor|Genghisids}}. An editor is likely to preserve the anchor. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Nederlandse Leeuw if you meant to nominate all of them, then no. if you want to nominate multiple redirects at once, you could try this mass xfd tool. then again, it doesn't matter much, since anyone could just do whatever is deemed necessary with them after this is closed (except deleting, that's an admin thing) cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• See this version of the Chingisid article. The broadest meaning of the term is "to do with Ghengis Khan", and could mean "descended from Ghengis" but could have various other meanings depending on context. Possibly the solution would be to pick the spelling used in the largest number of articles and make it a disambiguation page pointing to Descent from Genghis Khan, Yassa, Khanate and Golden Horde. Point the other spellings to the disambiguation page. Links can then be cleaned up to point to the page that discusses the intended meaning. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  A disamb page might indeed be the best solution here. What do others think? NLeeuw (talk) 14:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• I've been intending to create a new article on the Chinggisid dynasty for some time. If others are amenable, I can get started in the next couple of days. The first nine redirects can then target that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Pages that refer to Chinggisid dynasty should link to it directly. But the disambiguation page would also list Descent from Genghis Khan, the Chingisid principle (Yassa golden lineage), Chingisid states (Khanates), Chingisid people (e.g. Golden Horde) and Chingizid (moth). The various forms of Chingisid should redirect to the disambiguation page. A page that included a link to, e.g., Chingizid would be flagged for clarification. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
    • Of course, if the dynasty is the dominant meaning of the term (I don't think it is, may be wrong), the forms of Chingisid would redirect to Chinggisid dynasty, which would have a hatnote {{Otheruses|Chinggisid (disambiguation)}}, and Chinggisid (disambiguation) would list the other meanings. We need a list of all pages that use some variant of the word, with or without a link, showing what they mean by it. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      I don't think "Chingisid dynasty" as such makes much sense. There are competing definitions of what a "dynasty" even is; a series of hereditary monarchs who each sat on the throne, excluding all their relatives who didn't? The entire family of that series of hereditary monarchs? The "state" or "empire" governed by them? Etc. See the discussions about Rurikid dynasty and category:Rurik dynasty, where we ended up renaming them to just Rurikids and Category:Rurikids. Similarly, see the recent scholarly work of Raffensperger & Ostrowski 2023, The Ruling Families of Rus, where the whole concept of a dynasty is heavily criticised as an outdated and ambigious concept that erases lots of people from history who didn't sit on the throne, despite wielding significant political or otherwise power and influence for sometimes decades. (Note: they also discuss 'house', 'clan' and 'family', and end up choosing 'family', as can be seen in the title.) If there is to be a new article, separate from the existing ones on Borjigin and Descent from Genghis Khan, I strongly recommend that the title be Chingisids, and to omit a word like 'dynasty'. NLeeuw (talk) 20:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      PS: But really, I think such an article might easily become a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of the existing articles, so let's make sure it would have added value separate from what we've already got, or integrate such contents into our existing articles. My question here is just to make consistent redirects. NLeeuw (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      I strongly disagree. The term "Chinggisids" has strong independent notability as distinct from the Borjigin. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

      I may start an Index of articles related to Ghengis Khan, including redirects. I suspect there is a fair amount of forking. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The Crimean Giray dynasty was referred to as the "Genghisids". Genghisid/Chinggisid literally means Borjigin dynasty. Descent from Genghis Khan is irrelevant in this context, and I don't even know why this article exists. Should be merged. "Chingisid dynasty" doesn't exist. Only two words should be redirected Chinggisids and Genghisids. Beshogur (talk) 21:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps, but similarly, lots of people were referred to, or referred to themselves, as "Romans", and yet histiographical convention names a great number of them "Byzantines", for example. We could theoretically always merge everything, but we'll soon end up with articles that are WP:TOOLONG (e.g. List of Roman emperors should imo have been split, because it's way too long to navigate comfortably, and we already had List of Byzantine emperors.) Although I made a plea for not splitting off a new articles named Chingisids above if there was no obvious need, I think we shouldn't underestimate the value of splitting up articles either. NLeeuw (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that Descent from Genghis Khan is a very odd article that should probably be redirected, but Chinggisid is distinct from the wider Borjigin term primarily because it was descent from Genghis, not general membership of the Borjigin, that legitimised rule in the post-Mongol world. See discussion in e.g. May 2017. While the Borjigin altan urugh (golden family) included the descendants of Genghis's brothers and of his children by concubines such as Kolgen, they were not eligible for rulership because they were not Chinggisid. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I think I see a solution. I will expand Chinggisids until it is reasonably complete; Borjigin needs also a little bit of expansion and a lot of rewriting to match current scholarship (many of its sources are half a century old and vastly out of date).

Meanwhile, Descent from Genghis Khan should be renamed and refocused onto the matter of genetic descent from Genghis—i.e. the numerous papers that have been released after the "16 million descendants" article from 2003.

All redirects seem fairly self-explanatory then, except for Jochid/Jochids which should probably redirect to Golden Horde, and Family tree of Genghis Khan which would probably work best as a redirect to Chinggisids, if I can figure out how the family tree thing works. Thanks for bringing matter up, NLeeuw. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! Yes, I suppose renaming Descent from Genghis Khan to Genetic descent from Genghis Khan or something works better. Chinggisids can then fully focus on the reigning families of the late Middle Ages descended from Genghis or married into that family. NLeeuw (talk) 16:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

PS: I would recommend doing a search query in reliable sources to check for the WP:COMMONNAME. We better prevent endless disputes about how to spel "Chingisids" (I don't care which, but we need to pick one). NLeeuw (talk) 16:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The current spelling (Chinggisids) is favoured in most reliable sources that I can see, including all cited so far in the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Ngrams appears to overwhelmingly agree. I'm a bit surprised; I'm not that familiar with the double g spelling. Halperin 1987, which I use a lot for reference, has single g, single s, and some of his sources are single g, double s, but apparently they are in the minority. Ngrams shows the double g, single s spelling quickly gaining ground from the 1990s onwards. Seems like you've chosen the right title, so I guess that settles it. NLeeuw (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Kentuchy

• Kentuchy → Kentucky  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment looks like it could be an OCR error or a pronunciation spelling -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak delete doesn't seem plausable but does get some Google results. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: 48 total page views since creation. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

凧

• 凧 → Kite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

mentioned, but not directly. the article mentions 祝い凧 (iwai tako, or celebration kite) as a funny thing japan does to celebrate stuff, but not 凧 (tako, or kite). opinions? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:RFOR, this subject does have some affinity for Japanese given the history of kites. Furthermore, the kanji does appear in the article-- no, not solo, but 祝い just means celebration, and is a very simple grammatical adjective; it does not make the combination 祝い凧 a unique and different word. Fieari (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

oh right yeah while we're at it, should i create 祝い凧 after this is done? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 23:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Lu Tianna

• Lu Tianna → Kirsten Gillibrand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's unclear why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak delete This site and other, seemingly less reliable, sources indicate that "Lu Tianna" is a Chinese-language name adopted by or used to refer to Gillibrand. There is precedent to keep these sorts of names, as seen in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Foreign language redirects to Kamala Harris. But, unlike Harris's Chinese names, I don't find evidence of widespread use. I am willing to reconsider if evidence that this is indeed commonly used by Chinese speakers to refer to Gillibrand exists. Note that Lu Tian Na, which is used here by the New York Times, exists as well. I am not a Chinese speaker so cannot say if the number of words makes a difference. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment if this is treated like a Chinese name, then the variant spellings available from "Lu Tianna" would be "Lu Tian-na", "Lu Tian-Na", "Lu Tian Na" -- and the flipped forms "Tianna Lu", "Tian-na Lu", "Tian Na Lu" -- NYT uses one of the styles you can do with the syllables. In the PRC, the preferred form would have a single "word" to represent a name, so "Lu Tianna" if Lu is the surname and Tianna is the given name. This isn't the preferred style used in Hong Kong or Taiwan though. That is dependent and independent on romanization method, as some people style their names differently from the romanization method's preferred form. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Her Chinese name is known by the Chinese-language world, used by Chinese-language media. I can search a bunch of news article if I search on Google by her Chinese name "陸天娜" [1][2][3]. The name Lu Tianna (陆天娜; 陸天娜) is used by herself, pretty irrelevant to her English name. Lu Tianna, Lu Tian Na, Lu Tian-Na, Lu Tian-na are essentially the same, just with or without space or hyphen. It is just the difference of transliteration, all of them are used to some degree (and actually "Lu Tianna" is the most conventional transliteration). However, the transliteration is not a conventional way to refer to her, not in Chinese media or English media. This makes me doubt but I am still leaning that it is more useful than harmful. Sun8908 _Talk 14:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Not mentioned at target. If you have to do this level of OR to justify a redirect, then just don't. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Pppery. It seems other Chinese language name will preferred from Kirsten. Unfortunately, there is no absolutely match why did transliterated in other romanization name. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 01:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

FC Türkiye II

• FC Türkiye II → FC Türkiye Wilhelmsburg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This could refer to the B-team of the target club, but it isn't mentioned in that page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - if the other thing this could refer to isn't mentioned on Wikipedia, then the redirect is fine. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  Please see WP:RSURPRISE. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 01:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Enteractive

• Enteractive → LJN  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unmentioned, results gave me some unrelated brand that does Things™. incoming links seem to imply that it's a developer that worked under ljn maybe probably, but that's all the info i got cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to Interactive (disambiguation) as a (mis)pronunciation spelling -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Interactive (disambiguation) as a plausible misspelling (vowels that reduce to schwa can easily be mistaken for each other). Fieari (talk) 07:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  This isn't a schwa though; it's a stressed short i. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  My local dialect/accent definitely reduces it to a schwa sometimes, nearly dropping it altogether. 'nteractive. 'nternet. I don't think this is uncommon. Fieari (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Not totally off the wall as a misspelling, but still pretty unlikely given how common "inter-" is as a prefix. And in this case, having this would be harmful as it would inhibit searching for this actual term, which has quite a few hits in WP already as various company names (none of which are main enough for a redirect themselves). This seems to be what the original target was for, but I'm having trouble finding much about the exact relationship. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. And to add a little, god forbid I say the P-word, but yes WP:PANDORA applies, lest "enter-" redirects are deemed appropriate to make for all the (what I assume are) thousands of articles that begin with "inter-". This one is only even being intertained entertained because this redirect was up here for a different reason. Arguing for a retarget (and why to the dab page? Why not to the same place that "interactive" itself redirects?) is tantamount to saying: yes, we should delete this, but we should also make a brand new redirect, which no one seems to have bothered doing in the many years that the thousands of "inter-" articles have existed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
  • I was curious, and Special:Prefixindex/Inter just goes on and on, so I ran the numbers. "Thousands" is correct. There's currently 10360 mainspace pages with titles starting "Inter", and another 22605 mainspace redirects starting "Inter"; 10407 of those redirects target mainspace pages not starting with "Inter", so would need {{R from avoided double redirect}}s created too if we took this as a mandate.
    For my part, I don't strongly care whether it's kept or deleted, but do not retarget to the disambig unless something with that spelling is mentioned there. (And I doubt it would belong if it were.) Not a plausible misspelling. For context, original target was LJN Toys, which at the time was a separate article that did prominently mention this term. —Cryptic 19:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

comment: a little late to remember to mention and probably inconsequential at this point, but the only evidence i found of enteractive working under ljn was circular. that is, old diffs and incoming links cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

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) 04:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

September 31

• September 31 → List of non-standard dates  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of September 31 in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Can someone unify it with #April 31? Web-julio (talk) 07:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note a redirect with this title was deleted in 2017, but a deletion review discussion overturned G4 speedy deletion as it had a different target (September). Thryduulf (talk) 14:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  So now we have two other proposed targets. Any place this can point is guesswork, and a redlink clearly tells the user that there is no September 31. Still support deletion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Well, the current target already tells this day doesn't exist, especially cause if it existed it would have its own mainspace article. Anyways, does December 32 imply it exists? Web-julio (talk) 02:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget. October 1 would parallel an April 31 → May 1 RfD. But September 30 might be the likely sought-for page for users who simply forgot September's last date. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to September 30 per @Hyphenation Expert. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• September, which says that it has only 30 days in the first (very short) paragraph, makes more sense than either of the two new proposals, and I'd say to retarget there if there were any internal links. But there aren't, and a redlink is a better result here for all other use cases. Delete. —Cryptic 06:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Well, if September 31 ever gets talked about in Wikipedia, it would be in the current target (list). However, it's not yet. Though both mentions the words separatedly. Web-julio (talk) 01:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Pppery. There is no information on why did the editor must added in a leap year for September. IMO, there is only 30 days beneath the month of September but not added in one day. See this: [4] ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 03:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

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) 04:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

List of Chalcolithic cultures of China

• List of Chalcolithic cultures of China → List of Neolithic cultures of China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such list of Chalcolithic cultures exists at the target. This does not appear to be a subject that is discussed on Wikipedia at this time. Previously existed as a list with one entry.

This title may be able to be salvaged if the list of Neolithic cultures is expanded to include Chalcolithic cultures. However, searching for an article about a "Copper Age list" and being sent to an article about a "Stone Age list" does not seem generally helpful in a vacuum, and would be confusing to readers if there is no indication or hatnote about why they ended up here (that there may not have been enough content to substantiate an individual page for Chalcolithic). Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep. No, there isn't a list at the target, but several of the cultures at the target were able to work copper in their later years, such as the Erligang culture and the Yueshi culture, so it seems reasonable to keep this until such a time that a proper list is split off. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom - no Chalcolithic list exists. The page history needn't be kept. We have the redirect Chalcolithic China pointing to the same target, but probably that should point to Chalcolithic#East Asia. Jay 💬 13:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Karhusaari (island)

• Karhusaari (island) → Angelniemi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misleading redirect. There are several islands named Karhusaari in Finland, the island in Angelniemi is not the only one and probably the most notable either. The redirect had two incoming links, neither of which was actually about the island in Angelniemi: one was for an island in Espoo and the other for an island in Kuopio. I removed the wikilinks from both. This redirect should be deleted until we have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari. JIP | Talk 12:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. I created this redirect when reviewing Karhusaari (disambiguation) because of the line in the article Angelniemi: "Other isles of Angelniemi are Angelansaari, Kokkilansaari, Pikkusaari and Karhusaari". If there are other islands then fine: mention them in the appropriate article and disambiguate at Karhusaari (disambiguation) to where this redirect should point. Otherwise, we actually do "have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC) (Not an expert in Finland but once had a lovely trip to Helsinki)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• There are indeed many, see ceb:Karhusaari. Probably the base name should be a DAB and thus this redirect there. Karhusaari is also an island which has an article here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
  • @Crouch, Swale: ... but as you know, a disambiguation page is not a list of things in the world, but an index of articles on English Wikipedia (of which we currently have two). By all means improve the existing Karhusaari (disambiguation), because otherwise it can be deleted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Matsubara dialect

• Matsubara dialect → Tokunoshima language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention in target article. Google search pulls little results bar city existence and being a Japanese dialect. Blethering Scot 21:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

If they're called dialects (方言), they're actually Ryukyuan dialects, and not part of Japanese (see Japanese dialects). As for the existence of the Matsubara dialect, there are some information about the pitch accent data from a quick search:

https://doi.org/10.15002/00012659

I wonder what else could be the criteria. Chuterix (talk) 21:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Nueva Hampshire

• Nueva Hampshire → New Hampshire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Dakota del Norte → North Dakota  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be a fail of WP:RLANG, but I am not too confident. Weak Delete? -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. Half of the current U.S., including Dakotas, at some point were part of Spanish colonization of the Americas before Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. And given that USA doesn't have an official language and Spanish is the second most spoken, both redirects are justified. Web-julio (talk) 09:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete NH, keep ND as I don't see any strong ties between NH and Spanish languages. The area now in NH was not part of the Spanish colonization of the Americas so far as I can see, and only around 3% of the people in these states speak Spanish according to NH. However, ND was part of the Spanish colonization, and so has a tie to Spanish language. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Turkish Turkish

• Turkish Turkish → Turkish language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

nonsense redirect Golikom (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep As per this source, this source, and this source, "Turkish Turkish" is not a nonsense statement, but rather one used for categorical purposes.

We must also keep in mind that "English English", "French French", "German German", and "Spanish Spanish" all exist too. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Can hardly call these sources. Beshogur (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Comment: I assume "Turkish Turkish" means the Anatolian dialects of Turkish (i.e., the Turkish language as spoken in Turkey). In that case the appropriate target might be Turkish dialects#Anatolian dialects. Similar redirects include German German (redirects to German Standard German), Spanish Spanish (redirects to Peninsular Spanish), English English (redirects to English language in England), French French (redirects to French of France), and Portuguese Portuguese (redirects to European Portuguese). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:51, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  I fully agree. Of course, the redirect still shouldn't be deleted. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 21:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  Shouldn't be deleted because you created it? Beshogur (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's "Turkish of Turkey" if you look for the proper term. There is nothing like this nonsense. Beshogur (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  If we assumed users only used "the proper term" for everything we wouldn't need any redirects at all. BugGhost🦗👻 23:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  There is no single evidence that this term exists. Try googling google books. No one uses it. These "sources" aren't even sources. What's next? Making inventions, because it's ok? It doesn't exist and no one uses it. Beshogur (talk) 18:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  Beshogur I think you're falling into wp:bludgeoning territory - you have posted 12 comments on this RfD - I assure you everyone who comes across this listing will read your view on it, repeating yourself doesn't make yourself more persuasive. Regarding the actual terms, it's worth noting that "Turkish Turkish" is a more popular term on Google than "Turkish of Turkey" - see this trends result. BugGhost🦗👻 18:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  First, Turkish of Turkey is the translation of Türkiye Türkçesi, a common Turkish term used by the Turkish Language Association, second, that's not even a redirect, only mentioned in the article as a translation, because it's the second alternative name to Turkish. Googling "Turkish Turkish" can be misleading, because it doesn't look at commas, etc. I am saying that you can't find anyone using this in a linguistic book, whatsoever. How come no one discovered this until this particular user redirected in late 2024? Plus this user's one source is cooking book, another one Sydney government, another one some shady language learning website. It's not even clear that they're meaning that. What's next? Turkish Turks -> Turkish people. And this is my last comment. Beshogur (talk) 19:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete there is no such thing. There is "Turkish of Turkey" (Türkiye Türkçesi). Beshogur (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I assume "Turkish Turkish" means the Anatolian dialects of Turkish so non Anatolian Turks aren't Turkish? What kind of statement is this? Beshogur (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

That is a non sequitur. By that logic, French French would insult Quebec French speakers and other non-Metropolitan French speakers by calling them not French (which they aren't and neither is Turkish Turkish, that's why there is a second Turkish/French in the terms).

And to answer your previous question, whether I created them or not has no importance on whether or not Turkish Turkish should be kept/deleted. My sources are self-explanatory.

Here's two more sources I found with "Turkish Turkish" used in them. [5][6] 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 14:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Stop giving example of other things. There is nothing like Turkish Turkish, and these are the "sources" you have hardly found. Beshogur (talk) 09:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete I can't find evidence this phrase is used to refer to the language or any of its dialects. The sources provided by the creator read to me as simply codes for the specific courses. (See, for example, the similar listings for Chinese and French at UC Berkeley). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  Indeed, however the following 3 sources still use "Turkish Turkish", with the latter 2 sources most definitely not using them as codes. [7][8][9] 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 14:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  These "sources" are beyond ridiculous. Beshogur (talk) 16:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  How so? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep the government of Sydney, New South Wales uses it per the given [10] -- thus it is a reasonable construct. Turkish is spoken outside of Turkiye with non-Turkiye based dialects, so this is definitely usable. Refine target per Granger. And add {{R from avoided double redirect|Anatolian Turkish}} Turkish of Turkiye could also be created as a redirect with the same target and same Rcat -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  The government of Sydney is very reliable source for sure! Anyways, it uses "Southern Turkish" as a branch, then Turkish. Simply stop writing false information. This isn't even a source by the way. Beshogur (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

So you contend that the governments of Tokyo, NYC, London, Paris, Moscow, etc, are *not* reliable? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you should read what reliable are. Beshogur (talk) 00:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

This is about the existence of a term, not about an event. I would assume sources needed would be more lenient than those needed for an event's occurrence? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 10:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no such term. Beshogur (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. As a redirect, it makes sense. And since it's in use, it doesn't really matter if it makes sense or not, either conceptually or grammatically (but if it was grammatically incorrect (aka redundant or pleonasm), so all other redirects mentioned above, such as German German, would be pleonastic/redundancies). Web-julio (talk) 02:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

or retarget per anon/Granger. Web-julio (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense what? So no one discovered this until late 2024? Beshogur (talk) 15:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Putting wedge

• Putting wedge → Golf club  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 21 § Putting wedge – no consensus

Over two years later, let's try this again: delete per WP:RSURPRISE as unmentioned and per WP:REDLINK per my comments in the previous discussion's nomination statement. Steel1943 (talk) 17:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment shouldn't it just be refined to #chipper, per the last RfD? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Weak delete. "Putting wedge" is definitely a term associated with golf clubs but since we don't really know where to mention it or what it really refers to, we might as well put it in the bin until the term has an actual definition. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC) (blocked sock)

• Refine to #chipper, as an unofficial, possibly erroneous, but commonly/colloquially used synonym. I can find published attestations for the term's use (in novels and such), but it isn't enough for inclusion in the article itself. But that's fine and plenty enough for a redirect, no inclusion is really needed. The redirect itself will inform someone searching for it: "A putting wedge is more correctly called a chipper." Fieari (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Tata (Persian King)

• Tata (Persian King) → Tata (king of Awan)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There were no Persians at the time of Tata Викидим (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. The Persians haven't been created as separate ethnicity at that time. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• This redirect was actually created by Maziargh in 2010 as a redirect to Awan dynasty, then subsequently made into an article by AnnGWik and since moved to the target of the current redirect (none of that is necessarily a reason to keep, though I will also notify those users of this discussion on their talk pages). There is no Tata on List of monarchs of Persia but I don't know enough about the plausibility of someone (incorrectly) believing this Tata to be Persian to say whether this should be deleted or not. A7V2 (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  Tata is a semi-mythical figure, but the Awan dynasty dates to approximately 2000 B.C.. As far as I know (I am no expert), Persians came to Persis and became "Persians" a millennium later. If I am correct, Awan kings could not have ruled Persian people. Викидим (talk) 06:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  I was more getting at how likely would it be that someone would search for this person in this way, ie that people would think to search for a Persian king. But given the relative obscurity of this person, that question is probably impossible to answer so ultimately I don't think it makes much difference one way or the other if this is deleted. That said I think adding him to Tata (dab page) would be helpful and I will shortly do so, but perhaps you or someone else would like to revise my wording. A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as misleading per the abovementioned findings --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  Note that almost certainly the only way someone would find this redirect is by using it or following a link (which would likely be piped given the use of a disambiguator) so rather than being misleading, it can be helpful to help someone who is mistaken to find what they are looking for (but see my reply above as to whether that is likely to actually happen). A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep The existence of a redirect is not a "factual offering". The argument for deletion is like saying redirects from typos should be deleted because they imply the typo is correct. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC).

• Delete, the target is simply not a Persian king. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
• I echo A7V2's thoughts. As a redirect to Awan dynasty, the redirect was getting views from 2010, which stopped in early 2022. The subsequent views were when the article was being written, and this RfD. Ideally we can argue to delete this since we have a factually titled article now. But Tata (king of Awan) doesn't have any redirects to it. What would be a proper redirect title to indicate a king who ruled some thousand years before his kingdom became part of the "Persian region"? What is a more colloquial name better than Persia to refer to the historial Iran region? Jay 💬 19:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  The place is known as Elam or Susiana. Even (Sumerian king) disambiguation would be less factually incorrect. Викидим (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Keep and tag appropriately as a redirect from a (very plausible) error. A redirect is not an endorsement of accuracy, it is a navigation aide to help those who are looking for something find that thing. If someone doesn't know that a thousand years before Persia that land was known as Awan, this redirect will help them. Fieari (talk) 05:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Harapanahalli railway station

• Harapanahalli railway station → South Western Railway zone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no mention of "harapanahalli" at the target article, or any other indication about a "Harapanahalli railway station" at the South Western Railway zone article. The only mention of "harapanahalli railway station" anywhere on Wikipedia is at the overarching article for Harapanahalli, but this article has a good number of problems and only contains two references, so it begs the question whether the railway station needs to be mentioned there either. In any case, it seems that there may need to be a change to either the target, or to the content, or to delete entirely if its not necessary to be included anywhere. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Add mention. Railway stations that verifiably exist (and this one does) are always plausible search terms and are always DUE for a mention on the article about the line and in articles about the settlement they serve. Note also this was a BLAR and should not be deleted without an AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello I'm the person who created this page the Harapanahalli Railway Station which is functioning currently six trains are operating through this station please help me to publish this article

Thank you :) Darshan Kavadi (talk) 15:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• comment Each of the three division articles has a list of the stations within the division. These lists appear to be incomplete do I cannot give an appropriate target, but whichever applies would be a good target. Mangoe (talk) 10:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• I cleaned up the language at Harapanahalli#Railway Transportation. There are still no sources, so added a {{cn}}. Jay 💬 10:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no mention at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Linjian

• Linjian → Lin Jian  (talk · links · history)

The name, which is that of a town in the Chinese province of Shandong, is being redirected to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China spokesperson with same name. Either it should be deleted or be redirected to the target page I have given.Toadboy123 (talk) 03:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• NOTE this is a malformed nomination. There is no RfD header on the redirect. The current target of the redirect is Lin Jian, and not that contained in the opening of this section. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
• Comment Lin Jian is definitely the wrong target. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
• Disambiguate with a see also to Lin Jian (林剑) and Linjiang (disambiguation); there is Linjian (临涧镇) in Pingyi County, Shandong, China; there is Linjian (林尘镇) in Zijin, Guangdong, China, listed at List of township-level divisions of Guangdong; Chen Linjian listed at 2020–21 and 2018–19 Chinese Basketball Association seasons; -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 14:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. The first option to think was disambiguate per 65. However, note that the town in Zijin, Guangdong, China, is spelt Linjiang, and another town in Huazhou, Maoming, Guangdong, China (zh:林尘镇) was mistakenly written as Linjian in the list of township-level divisions of Guangdong, but it is actually pronounced Linchen (see also: Huazhou, Guangdong#Towns), which I have corrected, so it is not an entry. Therefore, there are only two valid entries (Linjian as the town in Shandong, and Chen Linjian the basketball player) with zero entries having the actual article, which makes delete the best choice, unless at least one of the article is created. Sun8908 _Talk 16:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• @Toadboy123: You had edited Linjian to remove the redirect, but you did not provide a new target, which is why your edit was reverted. Who is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China spokesperson you mention in the nomination? Jay 💬 10:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  That person is Lin Jian. Toadboy123 (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry, I misunderstood. In the nomination you mentioned .. the target page I have given. Which is that target page? Jay 💬 23:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per User:Sun8908. As far as I can tell, the primary topic is the town in Shandong, which we don't have an article for. I don't think this is a plausible enough search term for Linjiang, Linchen, Lin Jian, or Chen Linjian to be worth a disambiguation page. Best to let the search function do its job until an article about the town in Shandong is created. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

サイゴン

• サイゴン → Ho Chi Minh City  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Japan and Vietnam have quite an interesting relationship to say the least, but it's probably not enough to warrant a redirect to one of its cities. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Japanese: サイゴン, romanized: Saigon is the old name for Japanese: ホーチミン市, romanized: Hōchimin-ichi, lit. 'Ho Chi Minh City'. So, did the Japanese Occupation Forces during WW2 call it "Saigon", or did they call it something else? It is actually written as Vietnamese: 柴棍, romanized: Sài Gòn, so one would expect that the Japanese would have also written it that way in WW2. Japanese: 柴棍; or did the Japanese rename the city, or pronounce it differently with various Japanese sounds used for these characters? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Mongola

• Mongola → Mongolia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - Ambigous, could be aiming for Mongols (A and S are next to each other on qwerty keyboard). BugGhost🦗👻 20:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per BugGhost, ambiguous typo with both "Mongols" (typo by adjacent key substitution) and "Mongolia" (typo by omission) both of which are likely forms of typo to occur -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
  • On second thought, this could also just redirect to Mongolia (disambiguation), where appropriate entries could be found for Mongols (subsidiary dab link) and Mongolia -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Mongolia (disambiguation) per IP. Pageviews are decent and typo is plausible, so I don't see a reason for deletion, and the dab page has relevant links for both of the likely intended targets. Also (and maybe this is just for me?), in the search results for "Mongola" both Mongolia and Mongols are absent from the first page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

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) 03:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

History of the United States (2008–2024)

• History of the United States (2008–2024) → History of the United States (2008–present)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is the result of a bad page move but I don't think any CSD criteria applies to it. It is the result of an editor writing a new article that states that 2024 ushered a new era into American history. The article has now been moved to Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete for the reasons Liz gave. Nobody's going to look for an article by that name. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep, given the scope of the redirect is present in the target article, and then some starting 2025. Steel1943 (talk) 01:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - whether this redirect would be useful is just based on WP:CRYSTALBALL BugGhost🦗👻 08:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  WP:CRYSTALBALL doesn't apply here since the date range in the redirect is included in the scope of the target. Steel1943 (talk) 20:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's true that the date range is contained in the target - my point (which I admittedly didn't phrase well) is that whether this range (2008-2024) is a relevant set of bookends is currently impossible to determine. BugGhost🦗👻 00:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  What I'm trying to say is that's not relevant. I've seen several articles with incoming redirects that include date ranges which the target article includes, but is not entirely exclusive to. For example, see the list of incoming redirects to "List of Netflix original films". Steel1943 (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Someone using this search term will find the content they are looking for at the target. We gain nothing by making things harder for them. Thryduulf (talk) 20:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Who would be using this as a search term? Is it generally considered that American history ended in 2024? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep No one is suggesting that American history ended in 2024, but 2008-2024 is covered in the target article. Ultimately, this is harmless. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - It is a small issue in that, as noted, it isn't causing any harm, however I agree that nobody is likely to type in that specific string of characters in our search - what will most likely happen in such a case is that somebody will start typing in "History of the United States (2..." and then autocomplete options will present. If you do this now, you'll see both the (2004-present) and the (2004-2024), which in my eyes is confusing, especially if I'm a regular reader who doesn't understand Wikipedia's policy on redirects. What's more, this does fall into crystal ball territory, and is a title that makes implications which readers might take as reinforcement that Wikipedia agrees with a particular viewpoint, something which I think would be more helpful to avoid. Any implications about the period demarcations of American history are best left to our sources. ASUKITE 01:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Vendamonia

• Vendamonia → Mark McMenamin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target article. A google search combined term and name does not produce notable results. Blethering Scot 21:28, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Someone deleted the mentions of taxa, since they are fringe taxa, but they were described by Mark McMenamin (redirect)so they should be mentioned, I’m going to revert those edits Zhenghecaris (talk) 12:44, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete - Per nomination, it does not need fringe taxa list in his article either. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 22:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Californian city redirects

• Los Angeles. → Los Angeles  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• San Francisco. → San Francisco  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:UNNATURAL, the city doesn't have a full stop after it and isn't an abbreviation, L.A. already exists. See the most recent discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 31#Canada. where I noted that adding the full stop may suggest its an abbreviation or actually called this and that it could cause confusion with things that actually do start with a full stop though unlikely. Similar redirects like Chicago., Houston. and New York. don't exist. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:02, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Not a useful redirect and agree with above statement.Blethering Scot 21:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Jamie Boo Birse

• Jamie Boo Birse → Linux Mint  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target or anywhere in Wikipedia, miseading. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 23:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. This redirect is misleading nonsense that doesn't mean anything. 67.209.128.164 (talk) 08:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment A Google search found that Jamie 'Boo' Birse was the maintainer of Linux Mint KDE Edition c. 2011. JJP_Master (she/they) 14:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Google Currents (2011–present)

• Google Currents (2011–present) → Google Currents (news app)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are like 2 google currents and both of them are discontinued, but this redirect links to the one that got discontinued in 2013 instead of the one that got discontinued in 2023 for some reason. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Weak delete or else retarget to Current § Science and technology. The disambiguator doesn't actually disambiguate here, and it never has, so I don't see a good reason to keep the redirect. But if it is kept, it should be an {{r avoided double redirect}} of Google Currents. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Kingite

• Kingite → Māori King movement  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous and not explained at target. (Soft) retarget to wikt:kingite? Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:SOFTSP. Information about the mineral is certainly encyclopedic. Whether or not it's notable enough for its own article, I can't really say, but it's probably better to just delete this one. As always, a search will automatically include a link to the Wiktionary entry at the top anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  On second thought, it might be better to dabify this one with entries for the current target, and maybe Phosphate mineral for the other, which has at least a brief mention. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

No opposition to a dab. The term Kingite is regularly used in discussing the original forces that supported the movement during the war but the term hasn't been used int he article. I don't think it needs to be explained as 'Kingite' is obvious when given with the context. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• The current problem is the incoming links from other articles – they (five of them) are all for the mineral. Turning it into a dab page seems the most practical solution for now (without prejudging whether it might one day become the title for an article about the mineral). For the NZ topic, perhaps best to make the link from the dab page to Invasion of the Waikato, which uses the term many times, rather than Māori King movement. Nurg (talk) 22:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• DAB seems sensible, but I disagree with linking the dab page to Invasion of the Waikato. Kingite here is definitionally connected to the Kingitanga. — HTGS (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to create the DAB?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Fay Spaniel

• Fay Spaniel → List of Star Fox characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This character has no confirmed last name, and this isn't even the right dog breed. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - Google shows me that this name is in widespread use amongst fans, even amongst fans who say that they aren't sure whether she's a Cocker Spaniel or a Poodle. It's not just one corner of fandom, it crosses multiple different social media sites, fan sites, art sites, forums, and so on, and also it crosses over into the furry-sphere which is related but distinct from Star Fox fandom. It's certainly not an official name as far as I can tell, but the extreme widespread nature of this name being assigned to this character, rightly or wrongly, makes it a pretty plausible search. As a navigational aid, this will get a searcher to the right place where we have information on the character being referred to. Fieari (talk) 00:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history in case of support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Lanyard class

• Lanyard class → Professional–managerial class  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I have been unable to find sources that describe the Professional–managerial class as the "lanyard class", which could also refer to other class groups. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The phrases are used as synonyms in the Niskanen Center piece I linked in the edit summary:

Graeber suggests that the electoral collapse of social-democratic and worker’s parties in Europe is a result of a “revolt of the caring classes” against the “proceduralism” of the “professional-managerial class” for whom “rules and regulations, flow charts, quality reviews, audits and PowerPoints that form the main substance of their working life inevitably color their view of politics or even morality.” [...] Warren’s “I have a plan for that!” slogan appeals mainly to the PowerPoint masters of the lanyard class, not the people who have to navigate the byzantine maze of their oversight.

and also in the Telegraph:

...managerial class getting tax perks to feel good in their shiny new electric vehicles, while the manual classes... It’s the lanyard-wearing boss class who are enjoying the perks of subsidised electric vehicles...

PK-WIKI (talk) 21:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. This seems to me like WP:SYN from essentially a single source (since the second source given above does not even use the term directly!), and not a term in common use. Many non-managerial workers wear lanyard badges. You might as well create a link for the "suited class", "PPE-wearing class", "tabard class" or "steel-toed boot class". — The Anome (talk) 11:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

"Laptop class" is also redirect to PMC due to similar usage.

"Lanyard class" has similar connotations and is in fairly frequent use, unlike the other phrases you mention: https://x.com/search?q=%22lanyard+class%22

Blog post that defines it and also mentions an (unlinked) mention in "academic literature". Used here in an interview on Jacobin. Somewhat difficult to find reliable sources using the exact term, but it's definitely in use and I added two other reliable source citations above. Lots of "lanyards", "lanyard wonks", "lanyard-wearing", etc. in articles. "Lanyard" is a signifier of a class.

Definition also listed on Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:lanyard

PK-WIKI (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Great Depression in the Middle East

• Great Depression in the Middle East → Great Depression#Middle East and North Africa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target section doesn't exist, and there doesn't seem adequate information in the target article to refine this redirect in a way that guarantees readers will find what they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@Steel1943: This section explains that the Great Depression had severe effects in countries across the Middle East, and describes its effects in Persia and Turkey.

If this redirect page were deleted, readers might assume that this subject was too unimportant to have an article or section written about it. Jarble (talk) 23:38, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

On the contrary; if this were a red link, that would prime editors to know that an article about the topic hasn't yet been written and could be written. While we can't necessarily know what a reader would think, it's unavoidable that Wikipedia is a work in progress. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 19:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. The redirect to the by countries section isn't really what a reader would be looking for, I think. Persia and Turkey are not ciphers for an entire region of many countries, cultures, and conditions. If this topic is notable (it could well be; I just don't off the top of my head know much about the economic history of the region during that time), leaving it as a red link rather than a redirect will be more useful for cuing editors to know that there's not yet coverage of the subject on the wiki. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 20:01, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last try, folks!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Asmodel

• Asmodel → List of DC Comics characters: A#Asmodel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was blanked by Quindraco. When I investigated, I saw why. "Asmodel" was removed from List of DC Comics characters: A, therefore breaking the redirect. It was if Asmodel, who is apparently a ten foot angel/devil, simply blinked out of existence. I would imagine this would be difficult for any ten feet being to do. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anybody out there?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

GGKEY

• GGKEY → Google Books  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

no mention TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment apparently it's Google's internal ID number for a book [11]; as not every book has an ISBN or EAN or UPC, there would be such needed at BGC -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Google Books Key. It's a thing, and should be mentioned in the article. BD2412 T 18:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

  But it's not mentioned, so this redirect shouldn't exist. Moreover, just because "it's a thing" doesn't mean the article on Google Books needs to say anything about it. Our article should be a broad overview of the site -- what it does, its history, etc etc. A random technical detail of how it keeps track of ISBN-less books internally would be inappropriate to add. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, all books have a GGKEY at BGC, not just ones without ISBNs, from what I gather. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, not mentioned at the target, and probably shouldn't be (see above). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per IP. An (incredibly brief) Google search of GGKEY doesn't bring up anything other than guides on how to find a book by ISBN or similar identifiers, so it doesn't really seem to have the notability to warrant a mention at the article. Tessaract2^Hi! 20:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per User:BD2412. Notable that this and other disruptive delete request were made by a blocked sock, and then argued and supported by one IP editor, who has done very little for the past 6 months but vote delete in RfDs. -- GreenC 16:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

• Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam → November 2024 Amsterdam attack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The Holocaust in the Netherlands, where actual pogroms happened, is a better target than a WP:RECENT football hooligan clash. मल्ल (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands or delete. The Hooligan clash which was instigated by the Israeli supporters who where chanting let the IDF win to fuck the Arabs has nothing to do with pogroms. M.Bitton (talk) 16:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to The Holocaust in the Netherlands indeed, similar to the plural version of this redirect. Generally speaking a pogrom has to be initiated or at least condoned by local authorities, which even the most cynical amongst us couldn't say happened here. Smallangryplanet (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete "Pogrom" is not an established or a widely used term, looking at the coverage of this incident WP:RNEUTRAL. Retarget to the suggested article is also fine. — hako9 (talk) 20:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect as suggested, but I suggest adding a {{for}} hatnote (not a {{redirect}} hatnote, for language reasons) to that target. It is supposedly being used in prominent sources (and probably social media but I'm not on Twitter) to refer to the recent ethnic hooliganism, but I agree that it's inappropriate and insensitive to refer to this as a pogrom when actual state-sanctioned pogroms actually happened here. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep - Redirects are navigation aids. With the target article saying that the President of Israel characterized the attack as a pogrom, that's sufficient to make it a reasonable search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  The purpose of the redirects is covered in WP:RPURPOSE. The President of Turkey characterized the president of Israel as a "genocidal murderer". Is that sufficient to make it a reasonable search term, and therefore, a redirect? M.Bitton (talk) 01:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Your analogy doesn't apply. Per WP:BLP, it would be inappropriate to put into the biographical article on the President of Israel the personal attacks that some other world leader made (although it would be appropriate to say that he has been criticized). Likewise, we do not put into biographical articles all the insulting "nicknames" that Trump has given all his political opponents.

  In the case of this redirect in question, the target article specifically has the term "pogrom" in the article, and there are no WP:BLP concerns.

  It's somewhat bewildering that this is not obvious, and I need to explain it. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's somewhat bewildering that you missed the obvious point: the president of Israel is not a reliable source for such a statement. His irrelevant opinion can be attributed to him, but that's about it. M.Bitton (talk) 14:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  WP:RS does not apply to redirects. The question about redirects is whether it's a plausible search term. The fact that the President of Israel called it a Pogrom, and it's in the article, makes it a plausible search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Preferably delete, the usage of pogrom seems to be isolated to biased sources and should be avoided for obvious WP:NPOV concerns. I think a retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands would only work if it is retarged to something specific on that page. Esolo5002 (talk) 08:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong keep. What happened yesterday in Amsterdam was characterized by reliable sources as a pogrom. This is stated in the lede of the target. What happened in the Netherlands during the Holocaust was mass-murder of Jews, but not a pogrom or a sequence of pogroms. In fact, that article does not mention pogroms and never uses the word.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Have any of the WP:RSP described this as a pogrom in their own voice? — hako9 (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands or delete.

When I was a fresh-faced disambiguator, I came across an ambiguous link to a place in modern Belarus. I identified it.

The very next problem was identical. I solved that too.

The third one was the same, and I solved it as well.

At that point, I took a break, because for some reason I was unable to focus properly and was swearing uncontrollably. One of those three places, obliterated in the early 1940s, is commemorated by an engraved stone in the ground. The other two are not.

Calling the recent incident in Amsterdam a "pogrom" is an insult to all those who were victims of actual pogroms. FWIW, I have no Jewish heritage. Narky Blert (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Speedy and Strong Keep - What happened in Amsterdam was horrific and it needs to be reflected as such. It has been described as a pogram and that's because it was one. MaskedSinger (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'm going to try to say this as charitably as possible, but as someone whose relatives have had to flee actual pogroms during WW2, I feel I do need to say it:

  I find this comparison, made by heads of state or politicians and now defended by you, incredibly insensitive, deeply upsetting, and bordering, itself, on antisemitism, given how profoundly, by association, it minimizes the horrors of anti-Jewish pogroms and relativizes the atrocities of those that carried out pogroms. Especially now that it's become increasingly apparent the Israeli fans engaged in behavior that could itself, at best, be described as monstrous bigotry and cheers for ethnic cleansing.

  Either way, while I wanted to share how offensive I think this comparison actually is, I'm aware my feelings on the subject matter little. The only question that should be considered here is: per RNEUTRAL, is this term one that's been established by reliable sources to have due weight and therefore meets the criteria for NPOV redirects? I don't have an answer to that myself as I haven't looked at the proportion of sources that use the term, but I think that's what should be focused on here. LaughingManiac (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  @LaughingManiac How is calling it a pogrom bordering on antisemitism? MaskedSinger (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  I said what I said and have laid out my reasons for saying it already. Take it or leave it at that. LaughingManiac (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep A very quick Google search demonstrates that the term “Amsterdam pogrom” and “pogrom in Amsterdam” are being widely used to describe the article topic. This strikes me a reasonable search term; I personally used the redirect to initially find the article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC) EDIT: under wikipedia:RNEUTRAL we are permitted to use non-neutral redirect titles and are in fact given extra leeway because redirects are less visible to readers. Given that the the term has been frequently used in reliable sources and given that it is a reasonable search term for readers to utilize, I really do not see a justification to delete. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget or just delete - the reliable sources used in the article which I spot-checked do not describe this event as a pogrom; at most they quote Israeli officials doing so. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 02:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete The sources are not describing this as a pogrom. Netanyahu is not a reliable source for what this article should be called. Parabolist (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete An unfortunate event with poor behavior all around does not meet the definition of a progrom. If someone has called it that that can be reflected in the article text but we shouldn't be saying it was one. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 02:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong delete or redirect as suggested. Not a pogrom, though there was violence against Jews. Natg 19 (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 04:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands. This feels like another case of WP:RECENTISM. 67.209.128.164 (talk) 08:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget WP:RECENTISM in full swing. Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands per Ymblanter. The segregation and deportation of Jews in the Netherlands was a gradual and meticulous process. The holocaust article also has no redirects or incoming links from articles having "pogrom' in the title. If a president naming a recent incident as a pogrom, is irrelevant opinion, a group of Wikipedia editors characterizing the Holocaust in the Netherlands as comprising of a pogrom, is not any less. But if we have other redirects titled "pogrom" targeting holocaust articles where "pogrom" is not mentioned, or pogroms didn't happen, then I would like to look at those, and possibly reconsider. Jay 💬 08:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Ted, Ned and Ed

• Ted, Ned and Ed → Codename: Kids Next Door#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These minor Codename: Kids Next Door characters (security guards of the Mustache Office Building who appeared in "Operation: S.H.A.V.E.") are not mentioned in the target article, and they weren't mentioned in the now deleted List of allies in Codename: Kids Next Door or List of Codename: Kids Next Door characters (whose extensive edit history is located at List of families in Codename: Kids Next Door) at the times the redirect was pointed at either page. Plus, a Google search for this exact term brings up mostly unrelated results (including one for the category where the redirect is located), and the redirect is also kind of ambiguous (it could refer to any three characters with these names), so I'm not sure if this is really worth keeping. Regards, SONIC678 01:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete WP:XY seems unlikely to refer to this one, and more likely to refer to "Ed" diminutive which has been used to cover possibilities that reduce to Ted and Ned as well; and there are already Ed (disambiguation), NED (disambiguation), Ted (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

• Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories → Joseph Stalin#Suggestions of assassination  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

As far as I can tell, the target article doesn't discuss or even mention conspiracy theories. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

redirect to Death and state funeral of Joseph Stalin § Illness and death or Delete.

The section contains some theories by historians that goes against the mainstream consensus. However it doesn't have much detail, so WP:RETURNTORED may apply. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete--Jack Upland (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Aside from the nominator's rationale, the last word is capitalized, which I find very questionable. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Cite AV media

• Cite AV media → Template:Cite AV media  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

One of the many mainspace redirects that link to citation templates created by the same user. He has created many of them and I'm not in the mood for bundling so I might as well nominate one and see how that plays out. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete WP:XNR to the pipeworking, not even close to readership content -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep Is no different than Cite web which was kept several times. I don't think either should exist, but there's no reason for one but not the other. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

That was discussed in 2012, time to revisit it and get it deleted -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

NOTE #Cite web was nominated later today -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete while many results are for wikis many aren't so its not a Wikipedia specific term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The major CS1|2 templates should be frictionless reaching the documentation, anything we can to help editors figure out how to find and use these tempalates overrides any minor guideline technicality. Nobody has presented a practical reason why this redirect would be a hindrance, but there are strong arguments why it's useful to keep. Also I'm concerned by the sheer volume of RfDs by an infinity banned sock, which are then followed up by a single IP editor voting/arguing in support of the nom. -- GreenC 16:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode)

• Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode) → List of That's So Raven episodes#Season 3 (2004–06)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No content about the topic in Wikipedia, just a directory of TV series episodes. fgnievinski (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Raleway

• Raleway → Ubuntu (typeface)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect doesn't seem to make sense. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Pinging @Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson: as they made the redirect. This redirect also makes no sense to me, as the only link I can find between the two articles comes from Reddit, and even then it only appears to be used in a game. /etc/owuh $ (💬 | she/her) 02:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. There's a raleway font, but as far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with Ubuntu. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

So hell

• So hell → Dependency hell  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unneeded redirect. The term "So hell" is not mentioned in the target article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

So hell is a dependency hell about .so files, which .so is an executable format used on Linux. NagisaEf (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment it should be a {{R from avoided double redirect to|.so hell}} as the extension is ".so", so .so hell. the equivalent of .dll hell ; .so shared object is a dynamically linked library of software functionality; the target already mentions library dependencies. Perhaps a note should be added to show common library extensions (ie. .dll, .so, .lib, etc) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  .dll is used on Windows only; .so is used on Linux, Unix, etc. In Linux, .so format does not provide stable ABI. NagisaEf (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Arthur J. May

• Arthur J. May → Arthur Johan May  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Also Arthur James May. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

November 23

UTF-2000

• UTF-2000 → Han unification  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Non-notable subject that is not mentioned anymore in the redirect target article. See old AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UTF-2000. Nidaana (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Rules to consider/Confer in e-mail debate

• Rules to consider/Confer in e-mail debate → Wikipedia:No personal attacks  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary WP:XNR of questionable usability. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:20C5:2840:D036:C9B3 (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

The B

• The B → B (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. B (disambiguation) contains no topics referred to as "The B." GilaMonster536 (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep seems like a bunch of them could be so referred to -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Per Gilamonser; no evidence there is anything notable referred to as "The B." OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Don't you take the B or ride on the B, missed the B... there's a load of transport articles listed -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. To me, I would expect adding the "the" would take me to a disambiguation page or a more specific page rather than a generic article about the letter b. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:42, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak refine to the Transportation section per 65. That seems to contain everything that could plausibly take the definite article. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• My first thought is that there are a fair number of topics titled The Bee, any of which could be abbreviated to the letter. BD2412 T 16:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Snoutlet

• Snoutlet → Heterocrossa eriphylla  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No longer mentioned at the target (see history there for why I removed it). Was originally created somewhere else, which also has no mention. There is one on WP, but it's to a mere listing of an apparently minor character (unsourced) voice credit in an as yet unreleased movie, and doesn't need a redirect. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget back to Mario & Luigi: Brothership. That's literally a major character in the game's plot and the game just released so there wouldn't be a plot summary just yet. He will definitely get a mention once the editors do a write-up on the plot. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Update: The page has a plot summary now with Snoutlet getting mentioned. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Bleach (games)

• Bleach (games) → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bleach video games → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bleach games → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ancient redirects that are neither notable synonyms for that article nor is it used in any articles for the last 18 years. Should be deleted. For the first redirect, edit history is not notable either with only two edits and both being moves. The other two were created as redirects and never actually used. MimirIsSmart (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete "Bleach (games)" as unusable -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete "Bleach games" as horribly ambiguous -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Bleach video games. As long as it doesn't cause confusion somehow, and as long as there's nothing better to do with it (e.g. overwriting with an article), "X" is pretty much always a good redirect to "List of X". This won't cause confusion (what other meaning would "Bleach video games" have?), so this should remain a redirect. No opinion on the others. Nyttend (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Bleach video games due to its lack of other possible uses, delete others as unnecessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It seems like we have rough consensus to keep "Bleach video games" and delete the other two, but one more relist can make it airtight.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Whitewashing

• Wikipedia:Whitewash → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:Whitewashing → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unconvinced that the current target is definitely the right way for these redirects. Couldn't find "whitewash(ing)" or similar precisely. Possible alternative targets are WP:Conflict of interest, WP:Civil POV pushing, WP:Neutral point of view... Maybe I'm missing others. Again, still couldn't find the word. If neither the alternative targets nor dab-ifying nor leave as-is is a viable solution, then I guess... delete if no one objects? George Ho (talk) 07:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC); extended, 10:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Attitude flying

• Attitude flying → Visual flight rules  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Attitude flying" is not mentioned at the target, and definitions of attitude flying (eg [12][13]) do not correlate with VFR. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Attitude (engineering)

• Attitude (engineering) → Axes conventions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Given the other (and similar) uses of "attitude" at disambiguation page Attitude, I'm not sure this is correctly targeted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No clear target, especially with the disambiguator. It was leftover from a move about an hour after page creation. Retargeting to the dab page wouldn't be an awful alternative , but probably wouldn't be all that helpful either. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Fado (character)

• Fado (character) → The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment Fado is indirectly mentioned in the passage Tetra remains in the castle while Link and the King journey to the two sages who provided the Master Sword's power. They discover Ganon's forces murdered them both (which includes Fado). Maybe a mention could be added but I am doubtful. Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Older

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 21
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 20
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 19
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 18

Old business

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 13
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 12
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 11
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 10
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 8
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 7
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 6
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 5
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 4
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 3
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 2
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 1
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 31
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 30
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 29
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 28
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 27
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 26
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 24