Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 18

July 18

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 18, 2020.

Elysa Montfort

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elysa Montfort → MuggleNet#Podcasts (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Only mentioned in a reference, and I doubt such a passing mention is worth having this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not substantively mentioned in the article and likely to cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:29, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mikey Bouchereau

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mikey Bouchereau → MuggleNet#Podcasts (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not mentioned in the article and likely to cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:29, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

MuggleNet Chat

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:39, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MuggleNet Chat → MuggleNet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - According to the lead, MuggleNet consists of many things including "an IRC network." Thus, this is reasonable. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 02:10, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

BatDR

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 27#BatDR

Undersea boat

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 27#Undersea boat

Vereinigtes Königreich

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) Techie3 (talk) 03:25, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vereinigtes Königreich → United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Germany–United Kingdom relations a la Tiongkok (Indonesian for China) → China–Indonesia relations. -- Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:46, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 7 § Vereinigtes Königreich – No consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 17 § Regno Unito – No consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 19 § Reino Unido – No consensus

Oppose The title is "United Kingdom" in another language. Redirecting to our main page about the United Kingdom seems quite reasonable. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, retarget Tiongkok to China. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tiongkok points to China–Indonesia relations because that target has encyclopedic information about the term "Tiongkok" itself. Germany–United Kingdom relations has no comparable information about that term. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This has been discussed at RfD three time previously, all with no consensus, over the past 5 years - most recently in March this year. Given that consensus wasn't found in August 2015, May 2017 or March 2020 the chances of any consensus arising this soon after the most recent discussion seems exceedingly unlikely. Thryduulf (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Those RfDs were discussed whether we should delete redirects like this. However, this RfD can be narrowed to either retarget or keep. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
These redirects should not be retargetted. Someone searching for the name of a country is looking for information about that country, not their relations with another country. Indeed in this case relations with Austria, Switzerland and Liechtenstein at least would be equally likely to be sought. Thryduulf (talk) 16:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:FORRED - the United Kingdom clearly has affinity for German: by law their monarchs are descendants of a German electress, their current king consort was from a German house (prior to renouncing that title), and the current ruling house changed their name from the original House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha in WWI because of anti-German sentiment. I mean, you could probably say similar things about any royal house and nationality in western Europe, but that doesn't dilute the point. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep quite useful --Devokewater (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wikt:Vereinigtes Königreich, which actually tells readers how to pronounce this term and what it means, rather than the current target which doesn't even mention the phrase at all and leaves the reader guessing whether it's a {{R from synonym}} or {{R from subtopic}} or what. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss 59.149.124.29's suggestion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist (talk) 14:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Soft redirect per anon IP: much better for the readers to have the additional information. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the previous discussions in line with WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Verenigd Koninkrijk

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) Techie3 (talk) 03:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Verenigd Koninkrijk → United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Netherlands–United Kingdom relations a la Tiongkok (Indonesian for China) → China–Indonesia relations. -- Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 19 § Reino Unido – No consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 17 § Regno Unito – No consensus

Oppose The title is "United Kingdom" in another language. Redirecting to our main page about the United Kingdom seems quite reasonable. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, retarget Tiongkok to China. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep this was discussed in 2017 and in March this year. The consensus didn't change in 3 years so its unlikely to have changed in 3 months. Thryduulf (talk) 11:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Those RfDs were discussed whether we should delete redirects like this. However, this RfD can be narrowed to either retarget or keep. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do not retarget - if someone searches for the name of a country they are looking for information about that country, not relations between that country and another country (possibly one of several) that happens to speak that language. In this case it could relate to the Netherlands, Belgium, Suriname or various dependent territories. Thryduulf (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wikt:Verenigd Koninkrijk, which actually tells readers how to pronounce this term and what it means, rather than the current target which doesn't even mention the phrase at all and leaves the reader guessing whether it's a {{R from synonym}} or {{R from subtopic}} or what. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss 59.149.124.29's suggestion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist (talk) 14:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the previous discussions in line with WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Reino Unido

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:13, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reino Unido → United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Spain–United Kingdom relations a la Tiongkok (Indonesian for China) → China–Indonesia relations. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 17 § Regno Unito – No consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 19 § Reino Unido – No consensus

Oppose The title is "United Kingdom" in another language. Redirecting to our main page about the United Kingdom seems quite reasonable. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:26, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, retarget Tiongkok to China. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep for the same reasons as above. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Devokewater (talk) 12:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Those RfDs were discussed whether we should delete redirects like this. However, this RfD can be narrowed to either retarget or keep. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:50, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do not retarget. If someone searches using the name of a country they are looking for information about that country, not relations with one of several countries that speak that language. Spanish is the official language of 20 countries and Western Sahara. Thryduulf (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wikt:Reino Unido, which actually tells readers what three languages use this term, how to pronounce this term in all those languages, and what it means, rather than the current target which doesn't even mention the phrase at all and leaves the reader guessing whether it's a {{R from synonym}} or {{R from subtopic}} or what. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss 59.149.124.29's suggestion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist (talk) 14:09, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the previous discussions in line with WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Regno Unito

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:14, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regno Unito → United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Italy–United Kingdom relations a la Tiongkok (Indonesian for China) → China–Indonesia relations. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:42, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 17 § Regno Unito – No consensus
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 19 § Reino Unido – No consensus

Oppose The title is "United Kingdom" in another language. Redirecting to our main page about the United Kingdom seems quite reasonable. If it works, don't fix it. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:26, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, retarget Tiongkok to China. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will be nominating that redirect for discussion shortly. Thryduulf (talk) 16:08, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Soumya-8974: actually I wont be, given that that redirect is {{R from merge}} and there is a section of the target article that discusses the use of the term (and I've refined the redirect to point to that section). It is therefore not comparable to or a precedent for your nominations here. Thryduulf (talk) 16:15, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep for the same reasons as the other nominations. Thryduulf (talk) 11:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Those RfDs were discussed whether we should delete redirects like this. However, this RfD can be narrowed to either retarget or keep. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:49, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do not retarget. If someone searches using the name of a country they are looking for information about that country, not relations with one of several countries that speak that language - in this case Italy, Switzerland, San Marino and the Vatican City all have Italian as an official language. Thryduulf (talk) 16:08, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Devokewater (talk) 12:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Soft redirect to wikt:Regno Unito, which actually tells readers what language this term comes from, how to pronounce it, and what it means, rather than the current target which doesn't even mention the phrase at all and leaves the reader guessing whether it's a {{R from synonym}} or {{R from subtopic}} or what. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss 59.149.124.29's suggestion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist (talk) 14:08, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the previous discussions in line with WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Charles A. Van Rensselaer

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles A. Van Rensselaer → Charles W. van Rensselaer (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. Charles A. Van Rensselaer, a New York gossip columnist active in the 1960s, was not the same person as Charles W. van Rensselaer, a 19th century seaman. R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or perhaps retarget to Cholly Knickerbocker. I appear to have created this redirect in error. Certes (talk) 14:02, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk)
Delete, while the W and A keys are somewhat adjacent to each other on a QWERTY keyboard and "van" can be capitalized either way in this context, these were two different people, and we don't want to surprise readers by taking them to the wrong target. Could the columnist perhaps be notable enough for his own article? Regards, SONIC678 18:01, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Ghazwa-e-Hind

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedy keep per WP:BANREVERT. Also wrong venue. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ghazwa-e-Hind → Indian reunification#Religious groups (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Kindly remove the protected redirect, as the title deserves a separate article on it's own.

Wrong venue – Please refer to Wikipedia:Requests for page unprotection. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 13:55, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Urdu Bazaar (Aurangabad)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu Bazaar (Aurangabad) → Urdu in Aurangabad (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect is badly targeted. A possible retarget is Aurangabad but that article does not mention an Urdu Bazaar. Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:22, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This redirect is worse that useless because it implies that Wikipedia has information that it does not.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:23, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Urdu Bazaar (Rawalpindi)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu Bazaar (Rawalpindi) → Rawalpindi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no indication that there is an Urdu Bazaar in Rawalpindi and without a mention this redirect is unhelpful and possibly confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:19, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Though there is such a place in Rawalpindi (they sell books), Wikipedia has no information on it. Having a redirect to something that does not mention it is very unhelpful.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Urdu Bazaar (Multan)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu Bazaar (Multan) → Multan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no indication that Multan has an "Urdu Bazaar" and without a mention this redirect is unhelpful and possibly confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Though there is a road called "Urdu Bazaar" in Multan, it is not mentioned in the article, so it is very unhelpful having a redirect that implies that Wikipedia has information on this road.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Urdu Bazaar (Lahore)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 26#Urdu Bazaar (Lahore)

Urdu Bazaar (Islamabad)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urdu Bazaar (Islamabad) → Islamabad (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no mention of an "Urdu Bazaar" in Islamabad, and no information about it that I can find elsewhere. The redirect is therefore unhelpful and possibly confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:14, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I do not think there is such a place in Islamabad. The redirect implies otherwise, and is unhelpful because it does not take the user to relevant information.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:G

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 25#Template:G

Urdudaan

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Urdudaan → Urdu speaking people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Urdudaans → Urdu speaking people (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Deletion. Urdudaan is not a word in English. A search on Google shows that Urdu Daan or Urdudaan are personal IDs on social media. -- Toddy1 (talk) 04:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete Urdudaans & Urdudaan, the terms are neither used in English nor much in their own languages. They, don't link to any articles too.--Fz^tc_s 05:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Urdudaan has no relevance with Urdu speaking people and is different in meaning. Moreover this ain't an English word and have no or least usage in English. The other redirect Urdudaans(plural of Urdudaan) also needs to be deleted for the aforementioned reasons. (USaamo ^(t@lk) 07:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC))[reply]
Delete per nom. The target does not even mention the Urdu word Urdudaan(اردودان). –Austronesier (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Faizhaider (not terms) and Austronesier (no sources). --RegentsPark (comment) 19:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete entirely useless now. Editorkamran (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hogs Gone Wild!

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to List of Billy the Exterminator episodes#Season 3 (2010). _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hogs Gone Wild! → Billy the Exterminator (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hogs Gone Wild → Billy the Exterminator (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target article. A Google search indicates this is a separate, possibly notable television show. Delete per WP:REDLINK. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Keep, since the two are interrelated. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The two items would have to be very interrelated, such that they are both part of the same thing. Or one is a subtopic of the other, but so minor that it doesn't deserve a stand-alone article. So delete to stimulate article creation. Senator2029 “Talk” 08:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is mentioned as the title of the third last episode at List of Billy the Exterminator episodes#Season 3 (2010). Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - If this is the case, I am open to a redirect to List_of_Billy_the_Exterminator_episodes#Season_3_(2010). --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:40, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Freshman Year (Album)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 25#Freshman Year (Album)

Daehan

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Names of Korea#Han. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daehan → ko:한국 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete, unless there is an appropriate local page to retarget this to (previously targeted Korea). Sending readers to non-English content is not helpful. Additionally, the plain soft redirect template is not used in the mainspace. Precedents: Mohamed Chabani|, Saint Michel Boulevard, Bonne Nuit les Petits, Kumagai Morikazu, and Éditions Fides. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 01:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Names of Korea#Han, which explains it. "Daehan" ("Great Han") is a WP:PTM for Daehan Jeguk (the Korean Empire), which was then adopted as part of the name of Daehan Minguk (the Republic of Korea) and hence a bunch of companies there (e.g. Daehan Tire, Daehan Tungsten Mining, Daehan Hanggong). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:49, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- !— Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 02:02, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget, with thanks to the IP editor. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Draft:3D Weaving

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:32, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:3D Weaving → 3D composites (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @UnitedStatesian with the reason "created with incorrect title, then moved" FASTILY 01:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Raason for my housekeeping nom.: The move in question was a 2015 WP:SENTENCECASE case correction within the draftspace, from Draft:3D Weaving to Draft:3D weaving. Normally such pagemoves within the draftspace have the creation of a redirect suppressed, or if the mover does not (or can not) suppress the redirect creation, the resulting redirect is speedily deleted. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:52, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

China Harbour Engineering Company

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was procedural close as wrong forum. Per the instructions on this page: "If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. Place a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests." Thryduulf (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

China Harbour Engineering Company → China Harbour Engineering (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @Amigao with the reason "This is the more accurate name for China Harbour Engineering Company. The page should sit here." FASTILY 01:00, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as holding up a redirect-reversing page move. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should use WP:CSD G6 then not RFD. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Amigao tagged it as G6 in the first place. The nominator (an admin) then rejected the speedy without really stating why. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is a move request in disguise. In the absence of specific evidence that it's controversial (like an editor explicitly stating that they disagree with the move), I'm inclined to say it should still go ahead as a speedy delete per UnitedStatesian and WP:NOTBURO. I cannot tell from the nomination statement whether the nominator objects to the move or not, but if so (or if someone else objects) then discuss at WP:RM not here. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 05:44, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete to allow for page move --DannyS712 (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.