Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 2

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 2, 2024.

Jishan Alam

[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 💬 10:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed on target page. Not yet notable eithier. Blethering Scot 23:28, 2 November 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).

Heathe N. Craig Joint Theater Hospital

[edit]

There is no mention of "Craig" or "Theater" at the target article. This redirect is tagged as having possibilities, but such possibilities are closer to impossible if this redirect is a blue link and pointing at a title where the hospital is not discussed. Is mentioned on 3 pages: List of hospitals in Afghanistan, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, and Advanced cardiac life support. Unsure if any of these are truly ideal, however, or if WP:REDYES would apply. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with the other similar redirect as suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Al Mamum

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed on target page. Blethering Scot 22:27, 2 November 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).

Crop Protection (journal)

[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. Concern met (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 17:51, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of such a journal at the target article. People who are looking for information on this journal would not find it at the target article. Tagged as having possibilities, so perhaps this journal could be a standalone page one day, but a blue-link to a page-without-mention is not the way, it seems. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:24, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The solution here is to mention the journal, not delete the redirect. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:19, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The content of the page should shape the existence of the redirects that point to the page, not the other way around. The existence of redirects does not necessarily mean we need to add content to substantiate their targets, although that is often a good solution for inspired users to skirt the need for an RfD. I have no opinion or desire relating to the inclusion of this material. The redirect creator was blocked for disruptive editing and personal attacks. And the page being discussed here (containing no valuable history; this page is a redirect), can always be recreated at no cost when someone adds material relating to this journal anywhere on Wikipedia. That doesn't have to be this week. Or this month. Or this year. But regardless of what point in time someone wants to discuss this journal on Wikipedia, this redirect will be wholly misleading in its current form, containing zero content for prospective searchers all the while. Redirects without a mention are a perennial problem, and from my searches on Wikipedia there's been no demonstrable evidence at this point in time that this one needs to exist, and can't just be recreated at a suitable date once suitable content has been added. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of that rant, you could simply have done this this. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would not do that, because I did not think this material should be added. This is not an article about a journal. Deletion IS preferable to me, and is the only reason either of us are speaking here; to not have a potential article about this topic be turned into a redirect towards one big mission statement. WP:REDYES, and "deleting redirects which lie to readers" is valid. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The added mention was disapproved by the nom who still supports deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:24, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep due to the (absolutely valid) addition of the redirect term in the target article since the nomination. Crowsus (talk) 09:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • My concern was the act of forcing in a mention of a journal into the article, for no other reason besides the fact it got nominated here, fulfilling the desires of the blocked editor who created this misleading redirect to begin with. In any case, it's here now. Nothing else to be done. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:51, 3 November 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).

Cruciverbalist

[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. ✗plicit 10:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this term at the target article. Is tagged as "an alternate name" and "an alternate language", but I'm doubtful of both of these claims, as the word is in English and has a definition of "someone who makes crossword puzzles". However, Wikipedia is WP:NOTDICT, and with no mention of the definition or relation to the topic, this is not helpful as a redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:R#KEEP 3, They aid searches on certain terms. The term has currency in crossworld. [1] [2] [3] (PS: NOTDICT doesn't really apply; if anything it suggests making a redirect.) (PPS: Agree it shouldn't be tagged as Latin.) Hameltion (talk | contribs) 01:59, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to Wiktionary. I agree this is a plausible search term, but our Crossword article is unhelpful to those who don't know what the word means. Thryduulf (talk) 12:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:12, 2 November 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).

Scottish Nose-pickers

[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. There is also a consensus that merely pointing readers at the target is sufficient context without including mention of the term in the article itself (though that can be discussed at the talk page later). -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Note I've merged these two related nominations that had an identical rationale. Thryduulf (talk) 16:28, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this is a very-long established nickname with lots of independent uses, e.g. [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], and plenty of others. Thryduulf (talk) 16:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. BarntToust(Talk) 20:56, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I've added the other redirect I made of a variant of this name. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 10:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not mentioned at target/WP:REDYES. I would expect someone searching for this term already knows what it refers to, but is looking for information about its usage specifically -- information we don't have. And on the off chance someone doesn't, they may be left wondering why they were led to the target in the first place. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:43, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per 35. Possibly speedy as well. Maybe those sources are good, I don't know. But it is definitely not helpful for regular readers, because the only evidence that they might be at the right place is tucked into an October 2024 discussion in projectspace (this one). So readers are unable to verify any of that, or "easily check that information comes from a reliable source". On top of that, it's G10. No mention of "nose" or "picker" at the target. The example textualized at the WP:G10 policy page clarifies that "mentioned attacks are valid". It's never been the case where the opposite is acceptable (unmentioned attacks). Delete. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:RNEUTRAL, tag as non-neutral. This is a perjorative name that isn't clearly linked to its target at first glance, but as Thryduulf states has a long history of being used. I disagree with the IP's assertion that someone searching for this topic would 100% be trying to find out more info about what the name comes from-- they could just as easily be trying to figure out what it refers to. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:30, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "they could just as easily be trying to figure out what it refers to". But we have no information to help them determine that, or why it does. Wikipedia is not Google. If an ignorant reader puts in in the search bar, they'll have no idea why they landed where they did, with no information about the phrase they were looking for. It's misleading and a waste of a reader's time. Therefore, deletion is the only reasonable action here. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The readers would probably notice that the acronyms of both are the same. Ca talk to me! 06:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe, maybe not. And even if they do, they'd have no idea why they were redirected. Is this a common term? Is it a well known thing that someone used once with some encyclopedic history? Is it vandalism? The ignorant reader has no way of knowing, because we have no information about it. Wikipedia is not Google -- it's not our job to tell people what the term refers to without context; it's our job to provide the context. And if we have none, then the redirect shouldn't exist. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 15:21, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per Thryduulf. Sure, some readers aren't going to realise the implication of this redirect's existence (that this redirect is a term used to refer to the SNP). But if this is deleted, no readers will realise that implication. J947 ‡ edits 23:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "If this is deleted, no readers will realise that implication", and that's bad? Offensive redirects which aren't discussed at the target sounds like a reason to delete such redirects (RFD Del #3). I feel like we'd rather not expose readers to unsourced political attacks in the form of redirects, especially so because there's no information or sources in the article they end up at which could back up this title, and therefore no way for readers to determine if this attack has ANY basis in reality. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (other than from the existence of this redirect). J947 ‡ edits 09:31, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:09, 2 November 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).

Chaotolerance

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 10#Chaotolerance

Ra'ad 1

[edit]

The more I research this redirect, the more confused I get. For starters, this redirect formerly targeted the article that is currently at Fajr-3 (artillery rocket), and did for the past six years. However, before that, this redirect targeted the article which it currently targets. However, to throw some more confusion into the mix, another similarly-titled article, Raad-1, exists. I may have figured out a better plan for what to do with this redirect by now if it were not for its incoming links; I am not clear what subject these links are meant to refer to. I'm thinking disambiguate is the way to go here, but I'm incredibly unclear what the base title should be for such a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at Raad-1.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bhairabi Temple, Boudh district

[edit]

Among the temples listed at the article, "Bhairabi" isn't one of them, and the section this redirect points to no longer exists. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Burnt Food

[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. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without a lowercase version redirecting somewhere else, a search for "burnt food" in lowercase goes to the TV version, which is a surprising result for someone (like me) hoping to find coverage of actual burnt food. Sdkb talk 22:07, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have articles for charring, cooking, and combustion, but none discusses the concept of food and the concept of burning together. I am surprised the concept of burning of food does not have an article yet. Ca talk to me! 05:26, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same; there wasn't even an item on Wikidata until I created one. Sdkb talk 03:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 2 November 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).

Barney's Magical Musical Adventure

[edit]

No mention of "Magical", or "Musical Adventure" at the target article. People looking for this individual show would not receive what they were looking for at the target.

The only mentions of "magical musical adventure" on all of Wikipedia are at David Joyner (actor) (which is unusable imo) and Barney (franchise), which is only mentioned once, in a sidebar. I'm not convinced this is the best option either, but at least better than no mentions (which is the status quo).

It might've been possible for me to retarget to Barney (franchise) without RfDing, as a means of getting it off the current target where its not mentioned, but I slightly prefer deletion of this redirect and/or recreation as an individual page, if that's even possible. Pointing as a redirect to Barney (franchise), with its only mention contained in the infobox, is not very ideal for this subject. All of the other Barney DtV home videos in the infobox seem to have their own standalone articles, so perhaps this one has some hope as well? Especially with the history behind this title, (even if it was supposably unreferenced since 2007, until being BLAR'd in early 2024). Utopes (talk / cont) 22:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Farm park

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is an accurate description of zoos. Zoos are definitely parks, but they aren't really producing anything like farms. Even petting zoos, which have domesticated animals, can't really be described as farms. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:25, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, a little googlin' comes up with quite a few actual places describing themselves as "farm parks", which tend to be visitor attractions which are something like a park, but based around farm life, and not anything related to zoos. Delete as misleading/WP:REDYES. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for no good target. Like zoos, farm parks are visitor attractions with animals but that's about where the similarities end. Those in urban areas might also be called City farms, but our article on that is focused on ones whose focus is on food production rather than being a visitor attraction so it wouldn't make a good target here. We should have content somewhere about this type of establishment (not necessarily a stand-alone article) but if we do I can't find it. Thryduulf (talk) 12:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question - What is the difference between a farm park and a petting zoo? I would have thought them synonymous, but you've asserted they're not. I admit ignorance here. Fieari (talk) 04:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd say that a farm park is a broader attraction that might include a petting zoo but might not. A petting zoo is focused on animals that can be petted, regardless of whether they are typically found on a farm, while a farm park would typically be much larger spatially, include attractions not based on animals, and might also have animals that can't be petted. Thryduulf (talk) 16:07, 6 November 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).

Zulu Christianity

[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 Zulu people#Religion and beliefs. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zulus live in South Africa but I don't see anything about Zulus practicing Christianity so what's the point? TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:15, 2 November 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).

Shen an calhar

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 10#Shen an calhar

Wikipedia:Example of a redirect

[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... 05:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't an example of a redirect redirect to like an example page? I don't think anyone wants to use this just to get info about redirect policies. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:03, 2 November 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).

Lana Lang and Clark Kent

[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. Complex/Rational 23:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete
1. WP:XY
2. These characters existed long before Smallville.
3. They have their own pages. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:47, 2 November 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'

[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. Complex/Rational 23:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable redirect because of apostrophe. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:43, 2 November 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).

Georgea

[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 Georgea Regout. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 23:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Georgea isn't really that close to Georgia. Also, there are people whose first/last names are Georgea so it would be kind of a surprise if someone was wanting to search Georgea, but nobody whose names are Georgea appeared in the disambiguation. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it pronounced differently? We only seem to have one article with such a name documented, Georgea Regout, and it doesn't have pronunciation listed. --Joy (talk) 08:50, 3 November 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).

Yosi (Nintendo character)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#Yosi (Nintendo character)

Pufferthorn

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a species that appears in the Skylanders series, which isn't mentioned at the target article and wasn't at the time of the redirect's creation. One notable Pufferthorn named Pop Thorn may have been famous for ending the Trolls' usage of his species' thorns to brush their hair, and he is mentioned in Chris Edgerly's article, but I'm not sure about redirecting this thing there because it barely describes the species and the character other than Edgerly voicing him. I think maybe we should delete this redirect unless someone can provide a justification and/or a suitable alternative target. Regards, SONIC678 19:24, 2 November 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).

Lu Tianna

[edit]

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

  • Weak delete This site and other, seemingly less reliable, sources indicate that "Lu Tianna" is a Chinese-language name adopted by or used to refer to Gillibrand. There is precedent to keep these sorts of names, as seen in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Foreign language redirects to Kamala Harris. But, unlike Harris's Chinese names, I don't find evidence of widespread use. I am willing to reconsider if evidence that this is indeed commonly used by Chinese speakers to refer to Gillibrand exists. Note that Lu Tian Na, which is used here by the New York Times, exists as well. I am not a Chinese speaker so cannot say if the number of words makes a difference. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment if this is treated like a Chinese name, then the variant spellings available from "Lu Tianna" would be "Lu Tian-na", "Lu Tian-Na", "Lu Tian Na" -- and the flipped forms "Tianna Lu", "Tian-na Lu", "Tian Na Lu" -- NYT uses one of the styles you can do with the syllables. In the PRC, the preferred form would have a single "word" to represent a name, so "Lu Tianna" if Lu is the surname and Tianna is the given name. This isn't the preferred style used in Hong Kong or Taiwan though. That is dependent and independent on romanization method, as some people style their names differently from the romanization method's preferred form. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Her Chinese name is known by the Chinese-language world, used by Chinese-language media. I can search a bunch of news article if I search on Google by her Chinese name "陸天娜" [10][11][12]. The name Lu Tianna (陆天娜; 陸天娜) is used by herself, pretty irrelevant to her English name. Lu Tianna, Lu Tian Na, Lu Tian-Na, Lu Tian-na are essentially the same, just with or without space or hyphen. It is just the difference of transliteration, all of them are used to some degree (and actually "Lu Tianna" is the most conventional transliteration). However, the transliteration is not a conventional way to refer to her, not in Chinese media or English media. This makes me doubt but I am still leaning that it is more useful than harmful. Sun8908 Talk 14:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not mentioned at target. If you have to do this level of OR to justify a redirect, then just don't. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tripartite Treaty (1906)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Section includes one paragraph of some relation to the treaty, but the target itself includes a redlink to 1906 Tripartite Treaty. The topic is definitely worth its own article, so could just mark {{R with possibilities}} and leave it be.

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).

Tisha Punia

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No point in this redirect, there is no coverage about him in this page. should be deleted until an actual article is made. Sports2021 (talk) 19:08, 2 November 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).

Handegg

[edit]

Opening a discussion as this redirect's target has gone back and forth between Handeck and American football since its creation without any consensus. I would say it should clearly point to American football (or possibly Gridiron football), as even a fairly uncommon term for a major sport is far more likely to be the intended meaning by most users rather than an alternative spelling of an extremely small settlement on Switzerland. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 18:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • 18 Wikipedia articles have mention of Handegg as a Place. There are none for Football. Handegg as reference to Football is an urban slang contrived pejorative inferred to have originated with "round-ball" Soccer enthusiasts, who actually comprise an extremely small sample of "actual" soccer fans and aficionados -and- within that segment of slang usage, it is not used in the targeted American, Canadian or Australian vernaculars. Web searches reveal a mixed rejection/acceptance consensus. Finally, I don't know if this discussion's initiator may be a "such a slang user" themself (no problem for me) -or- has even previously edited redirects to American, Canadian or Australian football, but redirecting to Football effectively serves as indirection for the uninformed (which slights Handeck/Handegg references) and furthers the "joke" of Soccer origins.DeXXus (talk) DeXXus (talk) 23:10, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It seems the article on the place was moved from "Handegg" to "Handeck" without discussion. I don't know if that was a good move or not, but even if so, this redirect should stay at the place name, which does include a Wiktionary hatnote, which even notes that it can refer to other flavors of football, but for which we have no encyclopedic content about the term itself. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:30, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep, in case it wasn't clear per my comments above and Mx Granger's clear explanation below. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment hand-egg and Hand Egg points to American football, according to our Wiktionary entry, this is wrong, since it applies to all grid-iron, and rugby as well. hand egg is a redlink, while American handegg, Canadian handegg, and Australian handegg point to the expected destinations. --- I would suggest that hand-egg be turned into a set index of the grid-iron, Aussie, Gaelic, and rugby forms and their balls; "hand egg" would repoint there. "Handegg" would keep pointing to "Handeck" with a hatnote to the new set index at "hand-egg" which would also show wikt:en:hand-egg and wikt:en:handegg and hatnote Handeck; which has the redirect Handegg, Guttannen -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:51, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems fine to me. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A disambiguation page would also make sense, but because the usual spelling has no hyphen the disambiguation should be located at Handegg rather than Hand-egg surely. Chessrat (talk, contributions) 16:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are multiple uses of "Handegg" to refer to Switzerland on Wikipedia already, including other articles with that in their titles, so it seems better to use the form that is not used by Switzerland for the SIA name -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    IOW, hand-egg is the WP:NATDIS form for the sports topic, which does not refer to Switzerland, thus a better pagename for the title of the set-index -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The slang term is not mentioned in the American football or Gridiron football articles, so retargeting there would not serve our readers.
    • A reader who is familiar with the slang term and wants to read about American football or Canadian football will most likely search for those more conventional terms rather than an uncommon slang term.
    • A reader who encounters the slang term and wants to know what it means will most likely be confused by a redirect to American football, as the slang term isn't mentioned or explained there. That reader is better served by the current redirect and hatnote to Wiktionary.
    • A reader who is looking for the Swiss village, which is spelled "Handegg" in some sources, is clearly best served by the current redirect.
I'm struggling to imagine a realistic scenario in which a reader would be better served by a redirect to a football article than by the current redirect. See Talk:Handeck for past discussions. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:56, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bart (devil)

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of the word 'devil' on the page; original page contents seem to be a random listing of pranks the character does in various Simpsons episodes. Xeroctic (talk) 18:21, 2 November 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).

Tony DiGerolamo

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#Tony DiGerolamo

Blue Yoshi

[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 Yoshi. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 18:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Yoshi is only mentioned in passing as one of four color options, and blue Yoshis appear in several other Yoshi games throughout the series. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:49, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

clump together with yellow yoshi since those two colors will pretty much always pop up together. otherwise, the same vote there applies cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what "clump together" means in this context? Sergecross73 msg me 00:22, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i'm told some countries refer to it as "bundling entries together" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you meant the nominations? I thought you were referring to the redirects. Got it, makes sense now. Sergecross73 msg me 17:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
not that that matters much now, since it's almost close them o' clock. oh well~ cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:58, 8 November 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).

Yellow Yoshi

[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 Yoshi. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 18:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Yoshi is only mentioned in passing as one of four color options, and yellow Yoshis appear in several other games before and after this one. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to yoshi, as blue and yellow are the most common (and thus notable) yoshi colors that aren't green. both have existed since world (and so has red, but no one cares about red yoshi) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:45, 2 November 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).

Ultrajectine

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#Ultrajectine

Waking the Dragons

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#Waking the Dragons

Memory World

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 10#Memory World

Duelist Kingdom

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 10:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of a "Kingdom" at the target article. People looking for this information would not be satisfied with just the general concept article for Yugioh. This redirect has ample, non-negligible history, but is currently misleading as a redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:06, 2 November 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).

Pegasus' Cards

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 10:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of "Pegasus" at the target article, making this redirect confusing and does not give the context to readers that they were searching for relating to Pegasus' cards; (if they wanted to read about Yugioh, they'd type in "Yugioh", not "Pegasus' Cards"). Utopes (talk / cont) 08:04, 2 November 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 of Games

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 10:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While roughly translating to "Game King", "King of Games" appears to be a separate entity and both are entirely ambiguous and not particularly discussed. In the context of Yugioh, "King of Games" is a "card with a 1 in 250,000 chance of being pulled". However, none of this context exists at the target article, and this appears to be an undiscussed subtopic which seems to not be necessary as a redirect to Yugioh. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:01, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete. on top of the nom's rationale, it's vague as fr*ck, being pretty easy to confuse with the lord of games from that one banjo-kazooie game i want to forget exists, plus other examples i might be forgetting cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:49, 2 November 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).

Buster blader

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 10:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "buster" or "blader" anywhere at the target article. Was created as an unsourced stub in 2011 by an account as their only edit; swiftly BLAR'd after a couple minutes. Not a useful redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:58, 2 November 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).

It’s time to du-du-du-du-du-du-du-du-duel!

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 10:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible to spell out. Neither It's time to du-duel!, nor any of its infinite variations exist as redirects. No mention of this phrase at the target article general article of Yugioh. Obviously, no mentions of this phrase exist anywhere on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:56, 2 November 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).

Banning policy

[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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

I agree that "banning policy" is not restricted to the internet. Delete as too vague; we don't have a broad-topic article on banning. My second preference is to retarget to Ban. Cremastra (u — c) 19:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cremastra. The un-XNR retarget was an WP:ATD compromise, and is not the best. We don't have to make another ill-fitting compromise, to a target not having info on the specific "policy", and this being a recently created redirect. Jay 💬 18:46, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I agree with Jay, seems like a redirect that wouldn't stand on its own, ignoring the XNR history. Legoktm (talk) 04:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:45, 2 November 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).

Blocking policy

[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. asilvering (talk) 15:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:45, 2 November 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).

Username policy

[edit]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have added User name policy to this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to User (computing)#Username format and move the article hatnote to the section, with a better explanation of why WP:USERNAME is linked, so that those users who are as of yet unfamiliar with namespaces can find what they are looking for. The current hatnote is insufficiently explanatory, and if I was confused and looking for the wikipedia username policy I doubt I'd understand the current wording. Fieari (talk) 05:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claire Miller

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#Claire Miller

ChinaFile

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 9#ChinaFile

Chir'daki

[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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "chir" or "daki" at the target article. The page has history. Still is an unhelpful and misleading redirect to a page where the subject is not discussed. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; this is largely fancruft that probably won't ever be notable enough to be discussed here on Wikipedia. If someone wants information on the Chir'daki craft, they'll go to Wookiepedia. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:30, 2 November 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).

Murder of Paige Chivers

[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to List of murder convictions without a body. Liz Read! Talk! 00:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Paige" or "Chivers" at the target article. The creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:04, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 2 November 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).

Toady (Nintendo character)

[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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:33, 2 November 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_November_2&oldid=1257296480"