Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 25

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 25, 2024.

229762

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Keep per WP:SNOWBALL and I'm almost withdrawing this nomination.(non-admin closure) InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 01:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is similar to a previous discussion about minor planet names with only the numeration, intsead of the complete name. In short, this redirect is unhelpful, ambigous, and unrelated to 229762 Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà. I believe that no one will be normally searching to 229762 Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà by just typing the numeration. Although the minor planet's name is very difficult to type, there are still more plausible, natural and simple redirects, such as the provisional designatiom 2007 UK126. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per e.g. 99942, 136199, 486958. The redirects in the previous discussion were smaller numbers with only four digits; they could also refer to e.g. years. SevenSpheres (talk) 23:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for numbers that large it is unlikely that someone would type the same number as a large/well-known minor planet and be looking for something else. Also, someone having only encountered the current designation 229762 Gǃkúnǁʼhòmdímà will be most likely to search it by its number, as it can be typed on a standard keyboard and doesn't require additional knowledge of a former provisional designation. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 11:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep for sorta kinda the same reason as 177013 (check at your own risk, it's nsfw as hell). the number is a little too specific to be reasonably used anywhere else, so i don't see any harm cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

MOS: OVERLINKING

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Keep * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Precedent indicates this is not useful as a redirect. If "MOS" is supposed to be a namespace, this is not how namespaces work. Spaces should not be separating the prefix and the title, and MOS:OVERLINKING already has existed for seven years prior. Delete per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 5#MOS: HYPHEN and others Utopes (talk / cont) 22:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Mos:DAB and etc.

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. signed, Rosguill talk 16:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

The correct pseudo-namespace is MOS. Throughout the years, there have been a number of "lazy prefix" versions of MOS redirects floating around mainspace, which don't capitalize the full prefix of "Manual of Style". The argument is that "Mos" is easier to type than "MOS", and people that don't capitalize the searches would otherwise be piping their pageviews through the lowercase variants. However, this nomination consists of all the pages that are otherwise doing "two things ineffectively". It's implausible to expect someone to type "Mos" in lowercase, before changing their mind and capitalizing the rest of the title, or parts of. There are only 11 of such cases across article-space. For the rest of the "Mos" titles, the vast majority of these pseudo-pseudonamespace redirects are constructed like Mos:bold, in all lowercase for "maximum laziness", which at least serves a unique purpose that the full-capital prefix does not. The swapping back and forth between capitalization is unnatural and already covered by the search box. In all of these situations, the correct version of "MOS:X" already exists, so typing this in yields no difference in results besides unnecessary name duplication among titles. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: not sure exactly how implausible it is... I know that the WP prefix is case insensitive but don't always know if all the case variations after it have been made, so I'm pretty sure I have typed "wp:DAB" before, which works since WP is an alias for the Wikipedia namespace. I could see that logic carrying over to the MOS/mos pseudo namespace; deletion could still make sense since they're meant to be internal and are part of the article space and the bar for keeping is higher. Skynxnex (talk) 22:11, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd like to add a data point, fresh from my contributions: special:diff/1221026265: Mos:NOPIPE. And that's in a place where nobody can fix it. Paradoctor (talk) 13:35, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You made this error despite being aware of the ongoing discussion. You also linked MOs:DABSHORT in Special:Diff/1218386682. The reasoning for dropping the capitalization on the only letter that needs to be capitalized (i.e. the S in style) is unknown. Holding shift throughout is much simpler. More care should be taken when linking pages in edit summaries, to make sure the link works beforehand. (Mos:FOO is a wholly unreliable way of linking, and only affects 8 MOS pages total. The existence of one will never be assumable, as Wikipedia has never operated in lowercase shortcuts.) Utopes (talk / cont) 22:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I'm not often on this page, but isn't this a case where Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap applies? What do they hurt? One person's laziness is another person's efficiency. SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, plausible redirects are useful and it is nice to have a few lying around, but these titles are all the opposite of efficient. Efficient would be MOS:DP or Mos:dp, not swapping capitalization up and down multiple times. Pseudo-namespaces prefixes are not lowercase. The list of shortcuts is CAT, T, H, MOS, P, per WP:Shortcut#Pseudo-namespaces. Because PNRs exist in mainspace, yet point to technical/codified back-end MOS pages, a consistent structure is imperative for shortcuts. Because these titles are in violation of common-held shortcut practices, these types of titles are not cheap, as there is no need for every capitalization alternation over the moon. Pages that start with "Mos" are already out of convention, but they see pageviews due to lowercase-only typing. If these aren't meant for lowercase-only typing (due to the capitals in the title part), they should be removed to minimize the instances of unnecessary PNRs in mainspace. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom as an improper capitalization on a nonexistent namespace. (However, if any of these redirect have incoming links, replace them with their all-caps variants prior to deletion.) Steel1943 (talk) 02:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. All-caps are fine and the usual convention for such redirects, at least regarding the prefix. Gawaon (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Redirects are cheap, and these are plausible as typos from people hitting or not hitting caps lock while typing shortcuts. They harm nothing and can just be ignored by those bothered by their inconsistency. That's a you problem, not a problem with the redirects. oknazevad (talk) 13:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • While these redirects are harmless, deleting them only disturbs linking – typing in the search box will give the same result whether they exist or not. So strong neutral I guess. —Kusma (talk) 15:18, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per SchreiberBike. Why wilfully make things difficult? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep True namespaces are case-insensitive before the colon. Pseudo-namespaces might as well be the same. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Psuedo-namespaces aren't namespaces, and "Mos" isn't a pseudo-namespace (there is no area on Wikipedia where the "style" in Manual of Style is lowercase). People who use MOS titles are very well familiar of that, especially when they end up at a backroom title beginning with "Wikipedia" instead. Capitalization differences are automatically corrected in the search bar, so there is no need to have more than one capitalization change inside a term. Shortcuts are always capitalized, and the existence of "all-lowercase" Mos:foo versions are already an out-of-standard compromise that exist in some situations. For the titles here, switching between capitals and lowercases is implausible, not necessary to permit, and is cumbersome to deal with every variation of capitalization among shortcuts. Pseudo-namespace redirects from mainspace titles are in direct conflict to user navigation, so effort should be taken to reduce the number that regular readers could be exposed to. Exponentially increasing the number of "Mos:XYZ" or "MoS:Xyz" titles just because we can, exponentially decreases the user experience for people that never wanted to end up in WP MOS titles, wherever they may come across links. And a copious amount of titles that start with "Mos" (not a pseudospace) and have implausible capitalization does not help anything and only creates confusion on why there are only 12 such instances across every single MOS page on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I often forget capitalization, and I actually came here after using the redirect. Geardona (talk to me?) 14:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That would simply be impossible because all of these titles use capitalization on more than one occasion, so forgetting capitalization would have led you to a lowercase title instead. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Saying they're inefficient or untidy or whatever is silly: they're invisible unless you need them. So they're useful and have no significant cost. Proposer is creating work for the sake of a personal preference. ··gracefool 💬 12:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep: Would the same verdict apply to MoS:DAB, MoS:DASH, etc.? Those exist too, and they aren't for lazy people. Why turn all those to red links? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:19, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Pppery makes a good point. Whether this is a true namespace or not, users expect it to behave like one. Our goal is to help people find the target, not educate them on the finer points of namespace case-sensitivity. Owen× ☎ 14:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

App£€

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL redirect not mentioned at target. Unclear if this is supposed to imply the products are expensive or if it's leetspeak. My keyboard doesn't even have the pound or euro signs. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Okmrman (talk) 04:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Information Support

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Retarget to Tech support * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem like the ideal target for this phrase, as I believe this phrase to be ambiguous. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Kissing pussy

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 14:07, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely/not particularly useful search term which is rather unencyclopedic. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

1.3 patch

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 14:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not the only possible target for a 1.3 patch, not the only possible target for a fanmade 1.3 patch, and not the most likely target for a 1.3 patch (that seems to be cyberpunk 2077) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I feel like Minecraft's 1.3 update would also be more likely as a target. This is way too ambiguous and would not make a good disambiguation page, so we should just delete it. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, basically any game that has patches could use a 1.3 patch. I would even disagree on Cyberpunk 2077 being the most prominent, as I could think of like 5 others that were majorly influential, Terraria also up there along with Minecraft and a whole list. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Daikatana is perhaps the best target we have right now but search results seem like it'll take care of it so delete since it's too ambiguous and not primary "enough" even if primary. Skynxnex (talk) 21:21, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Could apply to literally any game with a version 1.3, too ambigious. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 23:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as someone who plays the farm sim Sun Haven (which doesn;t have an article yet), those updates are called patches (currently at patch 1.3) and it can refer to pretty much any game with those updates. A disambiguation page would be innapropriate for Wikipedia since there would be hundreds of video games. JuniperChill (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Too many possible target. Too ambiguous. TarnishedPathtalk 11:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

King Dede

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Keep * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very implausible redirect. Averages single-digit numbers of yearly pageviews and has less than 200 pageviews for its entire existence since it was created in 2015. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: tag with {{R to section}} (maybe with {{R from misspelling}} can't remember if that or incorrect name would be better here). Doesn't seem implausible to remember the name as just two "D"s as opposed to three since both are somewhat unusual and seems harmless. Skynxnex (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Skynxnex: Judging by the extremely low pageviews, it does seem implausible. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @QuicoleJR since I don't think there's any risk of confusion or this redirect making it harder to find another article, having any actual page views (which this seems to) is evidence this redirect is at least somewhat useful. Skynxnex (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Page views don't tell the story, I think this is a very easy mistake to make. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a useful redirect to chop off letters from the name, which ends up being closer in composition and pronunciation to King Dead. In any case, the correct version of "Dedede" is already autofilling after the just first three characters of "ded" anyway, so this redirect is functionless and otherwise confusing. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Keep. Totally appropriate {{R from incorrect name}}, which I created almost a decade ago. Unless there is some sort of evidence this redirect is ambiguous, the target is appropriate since the amount of "de"s in "Dedede" can be forgotten. Steel1943 (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...And I'm still convinced that this target is appropriate regardless of the "delete" vote I edit conflicted as the redirect is a partial title match for the intended subject, rather than having to transpose letters and replace an "e" with an "a". Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Dede and Dead can both be said in one syllable, and are each similar as 4 letters words. One can be formed by removing the vowel "E" and adding the vowel "A". King Dead, King Ded, King Dede are all super close. Whereas Dedede isn't just a letter swap, but a new-letter ADD... and then YET ANOTHER added letter, forming a three-syllable word instead of one. Also "Dedede" is insanely easy to spell and I would not expect any other spellings to hit there apart from King DDD. I'd vote to delete King DD were it real. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll also point towards Dede (religious figure) as being a leader called "Dede", which might have ambiguity towards this shortened Dede (especially as Dedede is never called Dede). Utopes (talk / cont) 21:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Problem is that still ... people can forget or not care about the amount of "de"s. And here, I'd believe the spelling rather than the pronunciation makes the difference here, meaning the likelihood of someone looking up this redirect to locate "King Dead" or "King Ded" is highly unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 00:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I think it's a believable typo, and redirects are cheap. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:36, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: not an implausible typo in my opinion - it's also worth noting that Dedede is listed in the 'see also' of Dede. I found this typo used in several locations online (e.g. [1] [2] [3]), which - in my view - show that it is a plausible mistake that can be made. I'm unconvinced by arguments of ambugity, as I couldn't find evidence that the phrase king dede could be used with reference to a dede (religious figure) - and in any event, if this redirect could be ambiguous with another article, I'd support dabification or hatnoting over deletion. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 14:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Genie (feral child and etc.

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Genie (feral child and etc.

Robert Marlow.

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 14:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary. I don't think anybody would add a period at the end of the desired page name, therefore, it can be deleted. 8086-PC (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 19:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Snow White remake

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#Snow White remake

The Face Of Dorian Gray(single)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 14:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible disambiguation typo. No pages link to it, therefore, it can be deleted. 8086-PC (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Nikolas Macko

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 08:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macko is not listed at the page for this shooting. What I will note, is that looking up "Nikolas Macko", the shooting almost didn't come up on the first page (was the very last result for me)" This might make sense as it took place in 2007, and as time progresses, older results are less likely to be promoted higher. But in any event, we have no content on this individual. In 2007, they attempted to fend off the shooting from taking place. But, these efforts are not described anywhere on the page or on Wikipedia, to my understanding. I don't think that this is a particularly useful redirect, in the article's current state. Just as Google displays a wide assortment of topics related to different "Nikolas Macko"s, if he isn't discussed in the article any longer, I don't think this redirect is necessary either. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it should be worth noting, this redirect was fully protected almost IMMEDIATELY after creation in 2007, and remained fully protected for another 17 years up until just a month ago. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Utopes: Judging by the Google search results for "Nikolas Macko" "shooting", a mention could potentially be added to the article. What do you think? QuicoleJR (talk) 17:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QuicoleJR: I mean, it used to be a part of a pretty hefty section a long time back, during the revisions I checked in 2007. The shooting article was getting what looks like 1-2k edits every day during the timeline and immediate aftermath of the shooting (the article now has nearly 14k revisions). I have to imagine that Macko's segment was removed for a reason. The article was mainly talking about his eye-witness reporting. I don't really see a need to mention Macko, especially when looking at recent Google search results, the shooting is now really low. I don't want to force in his name into the article if it doesn't need to be. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: don't need to associate a living person who's only connection seems to be an eyewitness. If he gets more, sustained coverage, then of course that could be added to the article and the redirect recreated (or what have you). Skynxnex (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Democratic Labour Party (historical)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. There was an opinion regarding the RfD deletion of the corresponding "Labor" redirect. It may be taken up at an appropriate forum as it pertains to an RfD close. Jay 💬 08:12, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A spelling variation of recently deleted Democratic Labor Party (historical). Likely not the same case as the Labor vs Labour spelling distinction has proven to represent different parties, but this disambiguation still might not be the most helpful as well. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ahmed adoodie

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 08:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gag name not mentioned at the target article. Additionally, I have not found any mention of it on this list (although it is user-generated and could be incomplete).

A variant of this gag name had been used in the Simpsons episode 24 Minutes according to the article, but spelt as 'Ahmed Adoudi'. Regardless, I don't think that this joke name is notable enough to be a redirect to any articles involving this. Xeroctic (talk) 18:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Basilan Unity Party

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 08:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Unity" or this party at the target page, people searching for this topic will not receive any information about this at the target page. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Asenso Abrenio is another example of an undiscussed party that was recently deleted. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Jau Bai Gavat Unseen

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 08:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a piece of programming, although it is not mentioned or discussed at the target article, and creates the picture that we have something about this topic when we do not. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Drama Juniors Marathi

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 08:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of any programming with this title at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Mental gymnastics

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 2#Mental gymnastics

Liquid nails

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 2#Liquid nails

PanoramaMaker

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#PanoramaMaker

Modmin

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Modmin

MediaImpression

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Refine to #Products. Jay 💬 14:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of MediaImpression at the target page. Neither this, nor "ArcSoft MediaImpression" are useful redirects in the article's current state, as we have no information at the stub for this subtopic. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Though I don't remember creating the ArcSoft MediaImpression redirect, checking the history confirms that it was in the article at that time but was later removed.
Further checking backs up my guess that I most likely created it as an EXIF redirect for "software used".
In order to address this issue that is causing you concern, I have updated the article to mention it.
The redirect can now be left as-is or changed to ArcSoft#Products.
Ubcule (talk) 18:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

TotalMedia Theatre

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#TotalMedia Theatre

Lady Godiva syndrome

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Lady Godiva syndrome

Lack of imagination

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. No participation despite a relist. Retargeting to Aphantasia from the nomination. Jay 💬 14:34, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lack of imagination isn't an "argument from ignorance". It's not being able to imagine and doesn't have to do with arguments. If anything, it's Aphantasia. However, this has been a redirect here for the last 21 years. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Baak (Telugu Film)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#Baak (Telugu Film)

Swinging sticks

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 14:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of things involve swinging sticks, not just pendulums. The word "swing" nor the word "stick" appear ever at the target page, and can refer to basically anything from baseball to hockey to swordplay and beyond. I'd be hardpressed to think this would be a likely search term for this topic only. Sure, the pendulum may look like "sticks that swing", but the inference of it being a pendulum I believe is the most noteworthy aspect. This is one of the few technical topics that is prominent for its recognizable name and functionality, not just being "sticks that swing". Utopes (talk / cont) 05:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:24, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Supplemental Result

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Supplemental Result

Strike Force Entertainment

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither "strike" nor "force" is listed at the target article, giving this title insufficient context as a redirect to the target article. There is no dedicated information on Wikipedia to this sub label. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Strike fingering

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Strike" not mentioned at the target either, and Cut fingering was recently deleted. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Split Rectangle

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a rectangle at the target article. And as per the box, no piece of geometry is getting split at the target page. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Split Box

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Box" never appears at the target article, and certainly not splitting one. The only few mentions of "split" at the target are in reference to Viacom's. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Soquid

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A neologism portmanteau of a "solid liquid". Picked up by Wendy's, but not mentioned at target, and totally not an all encompassing term for a Frosty, especially for a term representing a space between two distinct phases of matter. See Quasi-solid / Semisolid. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Solowheel

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Solowheel

Snaf

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was created as a non-notable slang term that was instantly BLAR'd, same-day reverted, and reverted back to a redirect yet again. Seems to have no business targeting the pieces of paper left behind after you hole-punch something. I never knew that these had a name, so there you go! Learn something new every day I guess, Wikipedia for you. There was Chav and Chad (slang) that were all in the mix around here, but as this is suitably short and not mentioned there or anywhere in this realm, it doesn't seem of use to keep this redirect around. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Shuggie

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Shuggie

Shoob

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 2#Shoob

Shoo-in

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Shoo-in

Shman

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of the term "shman" at the target article. Pertaining to more pronounceable versions, sheman has a different target, while all external search engines were pointing me to topics related to shaman. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Shadow Dio

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (video game). Heritage for the Future is actually another redirect, which already targets the same article. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this variant of Dio at the target article, as the word "shadow" never appears at any point. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

shadow DIO (case sensitive) is a playable character (not a boss, that'd be DIO (still case sensitive) with his jacket) in hftf, so i'd say redirect there cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Sexy flash

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not called a "sexy flash" at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Self loading freight

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vague term not mentioned at the target. While passengers might "load themselves onto an airplane", from a literal perspective anything that can move by itself is self-moving freight, and will not always be a passenger. Someone searching this term is very likely looking for something particularly specific, and if they really wanted to see the article for "passenger", they'd just look up "passenger" instead. Seems like keeping this as a blue link would be a disservice towards potential article creation for a transportation operator lingo. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:23, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Scrmable

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 5#Scrmable

Scranton lax

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Scranton lax

Marco Scocco

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this passenger at the target article, and is not a useful redirect on its lonesome without context as to who this person is. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:53, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Scientific sexism

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Scientific sexism

Scary sharp

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Scary sharp

Saturday Rocks

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a children's programming "Saturday Rocks" at the title. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ali O'Shea and etc.

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A list of characters from Fair City not mentioned at the target in any form. In these cases for Fair City redirects, my interpretation a "mention" is generous; this is just a list of names on a table that are only said once, but nevertheless at least they exist, and sometimes the boxes might make allusions to characters that didn't even MAKE a table entry. But for the titles included in this nomination, they cannot say the same re: having even a bare bones namedrop. They either appear nowhere on this list, or are an alternative name mentioned nowhere on this list. Utopes (talk / cont) 02:15, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I will note, for navigation purposes, the titles in this nomination are sorted from oldest at the top and newest at the bottom. Some of the older titles do have a light history, but none of the newer ones do (i.e. nothing after the year 2008 has any history). And for those that do have history, a good chunk have either been through an AfD, are so minor that they were redirected in various short periods of time, or both. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Sanju Bhagat

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "sanju" or "bhagat" at the target, or any context of his case of fetus in fetu. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Samlor mcheu

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention at the target, and could not find evidence of this spelling missing a vowel, and including an extra e. Seems implausible to me, although perhaps content at the page or a translation could clear this up. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

S from Hell

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this meme, or "hell", at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rute Gunnay

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Rute" or "Gunnay" mentioned at the target article, hasn't had content at this title since 2006. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rush (Leland Remix)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Retarget * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Leland" or a remix of Rush is mentioned at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Rush (Troye Sivan song), where the Leland remix is listed twice: track on the associated Remixes EP and track on the CD single version.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:12, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

RTV News Inc.

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#RTV News Inc.

Roshutsu

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Roshutsu

Ross and Rachel (song)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Ross and Rachel (song)

Roses (SoMo song)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a song called Roses at the target article, not a helpful redirect and indicates that we have content when we don't. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Romantic Homicide (Jaden Hossler song)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this song, "Romantic", or "Homicide" at the target article. The existence of a redirect indicates content that we don't have on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I know where it's supposed to be, it's a song of his, but it didn't chart anywhere and fails WP:NSONG. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 13:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rockman 4 Minus Infinity

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This ROM hack is not discussed at the target. No mention of "Minus", "infinity", "ROM", or "Hack" at the target page. The existence of a redirect indicates content at the target that we don't have and is never addressed, making this not a very useful redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of this redirect: I was planning on adding content about the ROM hack to the article when I had time, but it slipped my mind. I do think it is notable enough for at least a brief mention, with several articles about it on the internet. [4], [5] [6] Also, as a well-known hack, it is a plausible search term, and it's mentioned in multiple other pages on WP, which makes it a useful redirect to have.
I do agree that it's awkward that it's not mentioned at the target page - would it help if I just used these sources to add a brief summary of what the hack is to the article? I'm not super familiar with the exact policies here, so if I'm misunderstanding something, I apologize. HappyWith (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Yes, if you add information about the hack to the article and the information stays, then the redirect will be kept. Neocorelight (Talk) 11:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've added a short paragraph to the article. Guess we'll see if it stays. HappyWith (talk) 13:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also just to let you know, I've also made a redirect at R4MI to the same location. If this discussion gets closed as delete, that one should also probably get deleted. HappyWith (talk) 13:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rkkody

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Rkkody

Riksenergi

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this fictional agency/company (derived from the deleted categories) at the target role-playing game. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Redwop

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention or context as to what "redwop" is at the target article. Seems to be a company based on external searches, but such a company is not discussed at the article. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Recursive X-Y cut

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Document layout analysis. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "recursive", "x-y" or "cut" at the target article. Used to be its own article, but this seems to be a topic that isn't discussed at the overarching topic of "bitmaps". Utopes (talk / cont) 00:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget The topic appears to have been discussed in literature (e.g. [7], [8]), but would be more appropriate for Document layout analysis, to which I added a mention of it. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 07:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rail transport in Socotra

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

We have nothing to say about rail transport at the target article. Anyone that types in "rail transport in socotra" but doesn't click on the article or glosses over the unrelated info about minibuses (on a hunt to find information on rail transport) will get the faulty impression that rail transport is discussed at the target. We don't have redirects for topics that DON'T exist on an island, and aren't mentioned as not existing. We wouldn't have Horse transport in Socotra, Plane transport in Socotra, or Spaceship transport in Socotra just because "the article says minibus transport, so therefore it's helpful to know that these don't exist." Alternatively, a red link is more explicit that a topic doesn't exist, as it doesn't make people question the topic's existence, and think "Why does this redirect exist if rail transport doesn't, is the article wrong? Surely there must be something to explain this discrepancy..." Utopes (talk / cont) 00:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rail transport in X is one of those topics we have myriad links for for historical (cultural?) reasons, unlike horse plane and spaceships. Suspect this is one of those. I lean towards delete, but not strongly. CMD (talk) 01:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my arguments in the previous discussion. This is misleading due to the target not discussing this topic. -- Tavix (talk) 01:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per nom. I find it a bit funny for such a redirect to exist, especially because this island has literally no infrastructure Abo Yemen✉ 03:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom, the existence of the redirect implies the existence of something that just isn't there. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 06:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Rail Sim Pro

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Rail Sim Pro

Rachel Inns

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Inns at the target article. Used to exist standalone, before being redirected into the list where it was presumably mentioned, but no longer. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

R@ygold

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "raygold" or "r@ygold" at the target article. Seems to be a tagline or username, maybe, although I haven't looked too far into how incorporable this topic might be into the article. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This court document from another case gives more information about the word, and it doesn't seem to be specific enough to warrant a redirect to this case in particular. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 06:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Quantum realm

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Retarget * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Realms are not discussed at the target page. With the existing of a conflicting Quantum Realm, there's no diffcaps differentiation in topics. Should have matching targets, with a hatnote at Features of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, not the other way around. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:25, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_25&oldid=1224649224"