Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 8

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 8, 2024.

The Red Palace

[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. I'll move the novel to this title. Disambiguation should be at Red Palace or Red Palace (disambiguation), and anyone is free to do that if they think it's necessary. asilvering (talk) 04:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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).

Meetup/Ada Lovelace Edit-a-thon 2024 Cornell

[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 23:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate WP:XNR. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:28, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Unlike the similar redirects discussed recently this event is in the future (8 October) so the consensuses there do not necessarily hold. I've also notified the creator of the original page. Thryduulf (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete on or after 9 October, keep until then (unless the event organisers say it's OK to delete earlier). While this shouldn't have been created in the mainspace, it exists and may be on publicity about the event (it has been getting hits) so there is benefit in being as friendly as we can be to prospective editors until after the event. It's unlikely that this will cause any harm between now and then. Thryduulf (talk) 19:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:53, 8 October 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).

List of Grand Theft Auto Advance characters

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 27#List of Grand Theft Auto Advance characters

Predictions of the end of Facebook

[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 Facebook and delete Twitter.

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

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

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

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).

Kid Speedy

[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 23:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of these is mentioned at the target. I checked every one individually and there is nothing on the English Wikipedia any of them could be retargeted to, with search results showing the occasional incidental match but otherwise only turning up this page, as well as a Wikiquote page a couple times, which is normally not considered an appropriate target. Apart from Where's an Egg? and Eh! Steve, none have significant page history, with pages either being created as redirects or WP:BLARED from unsourced stubs. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This would probably be better less bundled. This is a bit too much to go through at once. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I concur, this is... way too much to parse, and runs the risk of turning into a WP:TRAINWRECK if people start picking out specific redirects to move to specific places. Send this one back with some smaller portions, please. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Last time I had a lot of unbundled nominations on singular redirects people were complaining that I should bundle them, so I guess you just can't please everyone. I specifically did not include any redirects here that had enwiki search results that were remotely reasonable alternatives. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest that a good place to cap it off is around 5-6 redirects per bundle, instead of 'literally all of it all at once' or 'every single redirect gets its own post'. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all of these unmentioned characters and media topics per nom. None of them are ever going to be mentioned at the target, or at List of Homestar Runner characters (which is almost entirely unsourced), so any chance these get repurposed, WP:TNT would seem to apply. The only thing here that seems even REMOTELY searchable as a regular term is "Marshie", which is only mentioned once as a family member of Linda Purl, but no evidence that this mother of the subject is known monomously. This is fine imo. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:08, 11 October 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).

Template:Highlights

[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 23:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very surprising target. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:08, 8 October 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).

Draft:Engineering

[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 23:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike the vast majority of redirects from draftspace, this was never actually a draft. Portal:Engineering was moved here by a new editor in 2023, and the move was reverted within a day. The resulting redirect is pretty surprising and doesn't seem at all useful, so I think it's better to delete it. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:00, 8 October 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).

First Americans

[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 2 keep, 2 retarget. If anyone feels strongly about deleting #3 instead of retargetting it, please open a new RfD. asilvering (talk) 21:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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).

Japanese opera

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#Japanese opera

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

[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) C F A 💬 23:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this phrase at the target article, no mentions of "always" or "till". This is not a likely term to use when searching for the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Except that it (along with "they paved paradise, put up a parking lot") is the part that most people remember - the title is buried in a single line towards the end. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That might be the case: that this string of 16 words is memorable in the context of the song. When people search Wikipedia, they search for titles of encyclopedia articles. If there's not a title, it scans the page contents for search matches. If you put this string in Google, "Big Yellow Taxi" is the first item that immediately pops up. The Genius lyric page, a link to Youtube, Big Yellow Taxi Wikipedia page, it's all right there. But Wikipedia isn't a lyric database. That line doesn't appear at the target page, so people searching for it in quotes will receive zero results. There's no way to know which line of the song is everyone's favorite, so unless there's sourced coverage about the line at the target article, and there's not, it's a confusing redirect without context. (Incidentally, they paved paradise and put up a parking lot actually has coverage at the target page, and exists as a redirect since 2007.) Utopes (talk / cont) 23:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There have been 27 page hits since the redirect's creation in August 2024. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Significa liberdade (talk • contribs) 21:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those stats include the time is has been being discussed here at RfD, which is not a reliable indicator of the normal level of traffic. Thryduulf (talk) 23:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is in the vaunted halls of songs that are never referred to as/remembered by their titles, and always referred to/remembered by their lyrics. When I saw this was redirected to a song called "Big Yellow Taxi", my first thought was, admittedly, that it was an incorrect redirect that needed to be retargeted to something like 'They Paved Paradise' or 'Parking Lot' or something along those lines. (Redrose64's comment was enough to disabuse me of that notion, lol.) As it stands, it's far more likely that a given layperson would think to type this, rather than the actual title. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People might use Google for searching "what is the source of this lyric". But Wikipedia is structured around topics and is not a FAQ. There is no topic or any material on Wikipedia called "Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone". You say it's the "far more likely name" without evidence, and I'm not convinced that people call this the "Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got till it's gone song" rather than the "Big Yellow Taxi song". Both search terms pull up the Wikipedia page in question when typing into Google. There's no need to bake this lyric and any other remotely thinkable lyric into a redirect, without having some sort of content at the target page to substantiate a target, and give people the information they were looking for. Lyrics can in fact, be topics within prose material. This is the case for They paved paradise to put up a parking lot, which is mentioned specifically. This is demonstrably NOT the case for the title being discussed here. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact it would not be a valid R from lyric, as "R from lyric" states that the title is "from a lyric...to a source that describes the lyric". And the lyric is not described at the target, thereby failing the only criteria to be a valid R from lyric. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:49, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect categorisation templates do not define what is and is not a valid redirect, they simply describe the typical categories of redirects. In this case there are probably more uses of {{R from lyric}} that don't describe that lyric than ones that do - I looked at 10 random examples from the category and 3 both mentioned and explained the lyric (although one of them only mentioned part of the lyric), 1 article explained the lyric without mentioning it, 2 mentioned the lyric without explaining it and 4 didn't mention or explain it. None of them really described the lyric. To me this suggests that the template needs rewording to better reflect actual usage. Thryduulf (talk) 11:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: I said no such thing. The great thing about RfD is that it is a fantastic spot for people to discuss whether they think a redirect is valid or not! A redirect can be considered "valid" for an infinite number of reasons, and calling a redirect valid is perfectly valid. Thank you for bringing to our attention that a number of lyrics that are tagged as "R from lyric" are NOT actually discussed on target page. I've been well aware of this unfortunate truth also. If it has a sourced mention, it can be considered "described". From your investigation though, 40% of lyrics tagged with that template AREN'T described, so depending on fit, length and suitability, these should also probably get nominated here too.
But back to your representation of my response at hand. I did not say it wasn't a "valid redirect", just that it's not a "valid Template:R from lyric". Whether or not someone thinks a redirect is valid, only that person knows. But when coming up with reasons to defend "validity", from my POV it's quite tricky for someone to cite the passage of text Template:R from lyric, when the text being cited expressly does not support undescribed, unverified, and seemingly unimportant/non-notable lyrics. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lyrics that are "undescribed", "unverified" and "unimportant/non-notable" are three completely different sets that have limited overlap. Of the ten I investigated, I would support keeping the majority based on my knowledge/what the article said; the others I would need to do more research. {{R from lyric}} is being used to mean "This is a redirect from a song lyric to the song that lyric is taken from, or another directly relevant target" and per policy being descriptive not prescriptive, that is what it should say. Thryduulf (talk) 15:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I purposely included all three of those descriptions because for tenses and purposes, there is a significant overlap, and should be. Wikipedia's WP:V policy mandates that all material in Wikipedia's mainspace (articlespace) must be verifiable. Redirects are material in mainspace. Per WP:V, in order for something to be verifiable, it must be attributable to a reliable source. If no reliable source exists, it is free to be removed until a source is added. Now, there are millions of songs out there, and millions of lyrics exist just WAITING to be redirect-ified (not exactly). But naturally, not every lyric is up to snuff. Some lyrics, are just random words on a paper, while others have a significant impact on people and culture as a whole. And it's those lyrics, which have had a significant impact, which ARE worth mentioning in articles. How can an "impact" be quantified? Coverage from a reliable source, at least one, to facilitate a mention and be worthwhile. This type of coverage happens ALL the time, so it's generally easy to find. If a lyric is not "important", it won't have coverage. Maybe there's a lyric that people say is "important" but lacks coverage? For those situations, WP:V is king, as we only host material that has been reliably reported on.
It is also true that "redirects don't have to be held to same notability standards that articles do". And that is correct. It would be a rarity, if not an impossibility for a lyric to meet standalone notability guidelines on Wikipedia. And it doesn't need to. So the bar is REALLY low. But lyrics must be verifiable, with the aforementioned verification accessible in mainspace. Most lyrics do, and the important ones have been mentioned, covered and sourced on Wikipedia (appropriately so!) But my challenge is that this lyric in this discussion is not important. Importance according to whom, Lunamann saying it's important? I haven't found any reliable sources covering this lyric anywhere, so I'm disinclined to believe it's truly in the "vaunted halls", and the onus is on someone that believes it to be worthwhile to find a reliable source to substantiate a mention, to assist readers in verifying that their search term is correct, because the existence of [literally nothing related to these sixteen words] at the target page is not doing it for them in the article's current state. The existence of a "redirect targeting the song" is not verification. A reliable source at the song article is.
My definition of descriptions being used: Undescribed = unverified -> apparently not important, if nobody's thought to add it yet, & as long as there is no verification or discussion at the target page. Which changes once a mention (description) and source (verification) is added, signifying importance. Wikipedia is a work in progress, so there's no need to act on any of this RIGHT NOW. There's always next month or next year or next 5 years. But in the meantime, the redirect not verified, not described, & looks to me to be not important (obviously some people disagree with "importance" bit, as people are !voting keep it as a redirect, yet nobody here seems to be up for adding coverage, so shrug. It's still undescribed and unverified in mainspace.) Utopes (talk / cont) 20:45, 14 October 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).

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

[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) Cremastra (u — c) 20:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Keep See [1] from the university's site. Relevant section: "Baba Saheb Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar College of Agricultural Engineering & Technology, Etawah was established during the year 1994-95. This college is a faculty of Technology of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur-U.P." -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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).

All-Star Batman

[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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 23:53, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weird case here. the different targets aside, primary topichood seems to have been entirely hogged by all star batman and robin, the boy wonder, and in regard to the second target, neither series seems to be "ongoing" (hell, almost none of the series listed there are, what's that about?). for this purpose, i made a quick draft for a disambig, which might be better off in one of those redirects now. opinions on what to do?

also note this discussion on cirno day september 9 that ended in a goddamn train wreck, and didn't even have the right redirects nominated. sorry, the oldrfdlist template doesn't work properly on the visual editor cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:18, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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).

Shady Sheehy

[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 speedy delete. WP:G7 by Whpq. (non-admin closure) Hyphenation Expert (talk) 03:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does not meet WP:RNEUTRAL. Cremastra (talk) 21:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of the redirect, I'm fine with it being deleted. I believed it was neutral because I've heard many Montanans, both Democrats and Republicans, refer to him with the nickname. Apologies for not obeying Wikipedia's neutrality rules. MontanaMako (talk) 21:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MontanaMako No worries. Cremastra (talk) 22:43, 8 October 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).

Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon Red (plus that other one)

[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 23:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

implausible mix of languages? less so for the "dungeon" part since the series' title uses ダンジョン (danjōn, from the english word), as opposed to 地下牢 (chikarō, from... not the english word), but more so over the colors being in english cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete. Yeah, the actual Japanese names of these games are Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon: Aka no Kyuujotai and Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon: Ao no Kyuujotai. (Although you're also correct that it's a little more correct to write it as "Danjon" rather than "Dungeon".) Given WP:MOVEREDIRECT, the correct move is to delete the malformed redirects and create the following instead:
Pokémon Fushigi no Danjōn: Aka no Kyuujotai
Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon: Aka no Kyuujotai
Pokemon Fushigi no Danjon: Aka no Kyuujotai
Pokemon Fushigi no Dungeon: Aka no Kyuujotai
Pokémon Fushigi no Danjōn: Ao no Kyuujotai
Pokémon Fushigi no Dungeon: Ao no Kyuujotai
Pokemon Fushigi no Danjon: Ao no Kyuujotai
Pokemon Fushigi no Dungeon: Ao no Kyuujotai
Which, the latter (creating the replacement, correct redirects) a task that I'll go ahead and do myself. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i didn't really argue that "ダンジョン" (danjōn) was more or less correct than "dungeon", just that the title didn't use "地下牢" (chikarō), so the use of "dungeon" wasn't too consequential to anything. this comment is itself not too consequential to anything and the redirects have already been created, so meh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:22, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, I've actually seen precident of the Japanese title being rendered as "Fushigi no Dungeon" elsewhere; it's not anything new. I could easily see someone plugging the name in as 'Dungeon', both while typing and while copy/pasting. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:10, 9 October 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).

Alicia Douvall

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#Alicia Douvall

Democracy Index

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Democracy Index

Tighten

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#Tighten

Naoki Tanisaki

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 23#Naoki Tanisaki

List of swears

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 17#List of swears

Ansem

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 23#Ansem

Häxans förbannelser

[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 23:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target (nor at the fiwiki sitelink). It doesn't seem like this is directly related? 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – seems to be an alternative Swedish title. Cremastra (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converse∫edits 11:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 20:49, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Google only knows this as the Swedish translation of a Danish children's book (Heksens forbandelse) by Line Kyed Knudsen [da]; we don't have an article on the book or the author. There's no evidence that the movie has ever been released under this title. Tevildo (talk) 16:33, 12 October 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).

Towel Trick

[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 18:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

mentions of the trick (which isn't very functional, don't try it at home, kids) seem to have been scrubbed off the face of the wiki in july 2008, barely 2 months after the redirect's creation. pretty sure there's at least one other thing that can be done with towels, but i can't think of anything at the moment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:12, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as ambiguous. On Wikipedia, there's a bowling towel trick (Trick bowling) and an MMA towel trick (Jeremy Stephens). There's also a TikTok challenge. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:42, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per both above. Googling the exact phrase brings up all sorts of things including towel animals and the tiktok challenge. My first thought was in relation to towels in the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy (see Towel Day) but it seems that few other people think that. Thryduulf (talk) 20:43, 8 October 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).

3RL

[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 18:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

stands for "three red lights", though this specific abbreviation doesn't seem to be used too much for the red ring, aside from 2 or so results i had to get to page 3 to find, written in some indecipherable glyphs for some reason. most results refer to a type (or brand?) of tattooing needles or something cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:52, 8 October 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).

Wikipedia:VB

[edit]

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

Rabila railway station

[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 💬 15:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mention at target. TarnishedPathtalk 10:57, 8 October 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).

Obstipation

[edit]

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

Alison Chabloz

[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. Mentioned at target. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 23:58, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article. Launchballer 09:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore article without prejudice to AfD. An article about this person was speedily deleted in 2016 under criterion A7 by Materialscientist despite there being multiple referenced claims of significance. I haven't checked all 16 provided references to see if they actually do demonstrate notability, nor whether she has done anything notable in the 8 years since, but what was not even close to justifying speedy deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not mentioned? There's been a paragraph there about her for years. (So keep, at minimum.) Hyphenation Expert (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Is and has been actually mentioned and discussed in the article. Fieari (talk) 05:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as others have said the nomination statement is incorrect, there is a paragraph about this person. As for the previous article, I would leave it up to others to decide if an already deleted article should be restored, not really something I can comment on without even seeing it, and I don't think a "keep" result here precludes the recreation/creation of an article over this redirect. A7V2 (talk) 04:31, 14 October 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).

Cards Against Disney

[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) 12:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention at target article. A web search shows it to be an unofficial, low quality knock-off that mimics the name but is not by the same publisher. Belbury (talk) 09:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

throw off a cliff- i mean, delete per nom. disney's still doing the cliff thing, right? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:49, 8 October 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).

Enigmatic Man

[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 23:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-BLAR page history in case of deletion? Also notified of this discussion at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fancruft, nothing worth keeping besides the mysterious "third power" (actually just darkness wearing groucho glasses) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:41, 8 October 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).

Mr. Bland

[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 Bland (surname). ✗plicit 23:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. This appears as a character at The Clocks and Cross My Heart (1937 film), as well as in a passing-like mention at Elwood Glover (where I'm not sure it is necessary); other search results appear to be generic mentions of people named Bland. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of the discussion at the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:43, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Bland (surname) per the IP recommendation. This seems the most fitting solution. If we really wanted to, we could add the characters (and nickname) to this page, but I don't think capturing those is necessary if they are just search matches without pages created for them. -2pou (talk) 18:27, 8 October 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).

Affine cone

[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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 23:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could also refer to Cone (algebraic geometry). 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:48, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at Cone (algebraic geometry) as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:20, 8 October 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).

Rio Este (desambiguacion)

[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) 12:41, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this redirect is plausible by WP:RFOREIGN's standards...nor do any of the entries on the target seem to be located in any Spanish-speaking countries. It may have been around since January 2009, but it hasn't been getting very many pageviews lately. Because of these reasons, I'm not sure if we still need this today. Regards, SONIC678 06:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this doesn't seem particularly relevant, [3] I'm guessing it's happening because of some sort of a glitch. For example, when I type in "Rio Este" into the search box, the first item is the normal redirect. But when I type in "rio este", the first item is this weird one. (Delete) --Joy (talk) 07:13, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete. someone looking for a dab in spanish would probably look for "rio este (desambiguación)", and even then, they'd be in the wrong wiki for that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:19, 8 October 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).

Gedko Powało

[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! 09:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a spelling mistake: proper name for the article is Gedko Sasinowic, proper name for the redirect ist Gedko Powała. My request for a speed deletion was reverted [4] Herzog von Teschen (talk) 19:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Keep - whether or not this spelling is correct (and noting that expecting a single correct spelling of a 13th century European figure's name is somewhat anachronistic), it is attested in this text and thus is a plausible search term. I don't see any indication that this is ambiguous or otherwise potentially harmful. This alternate spelling is made further plausible by the fact that in Polish phonology (and more generally across Slavic languages), the letter "o" is often articulated as a sound corresponding more closely to "a" in western European languages. signed, Rosguill talk 16:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rosguill. Thryduulf (talk) 19:36, 16 October 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).

Vocational education and training centers

[edit]

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

King Roland

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 23#King Roland

Shiro sAGISU

[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 23:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This was part of a mass nomination in 2019, but I suggest reconsidering this WP:UNNATURAL error that seems to be rather clearly created in error. See also the recent Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 20#NURALIZA oSMAN. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:59, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:00, 8 October 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).

Shamrock Airport

[edit]

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

Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur

[edit]

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

Template:Lang1

[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. Seems that someone took care of the transclusions. ✗plicit 23:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These should all belong to one set, or none at all. There is also Template:Lang which is completely unrelated to these. I think deletion would be a good option as I can't see any real reason to prefer one warning template over the others. Gonnym (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Primarily relisting since more templates were added.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 01:00, 8 October 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).

Banana Guard

[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. signed, Rosguill talk 15:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Banana Guard appears as a unique fighter in MultiVersus. However, Banana Guard is not mentioned at the target article, and therefore misleads readers who navigate to this redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bundled. Jay 💬 06:53, 8 October 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).

Banapassport

[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 Smart card#Video games. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a "passport" at the target article. No mention of "bana", implied to be short for "bandai namco", nor is there an implication of a "banapassport". Utopes (talk / cont) 23:22, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:58, 8 October 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).

Billy Rowan

[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 The Bill series 23#Cast changes. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:32, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target list of characters. I suppose they aren't "the Bill"... Utopes (talk / cont) 23:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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).

Charlotte Bishop

[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) 12:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Incorrect that the character appears only within a reference. She is mentioned as Paddy Bishop's daughter. However, this is a minor mention, hence delete to favour search results. Jay 💬 16:26, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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).

Decco Bishop

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 20#Decco Bishop

BlockParty (game portal)

[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. signed, Rosguill talk 15:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a feature called "blockparty" at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bundled. Jay 💬 06:53, 8 October 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).

Boussh

[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 Princess Leia#Return of the Jedi. Refined target and tagged as a {{R from misspelling}}. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:29, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Bous", "ssh" much less "Boussh" at the target article. Apparently this is a piece of Star Wars trivia. I can't tell whether this is supposed to be an alter ego name? At least, the contents of the article make no implication that this is supposed to be the case. This redirect otherwise leaves people guessing what this means or who this is, or if it's a lightsaber sound effect. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Leia was wearing Boussh's outfit when she infiltrated Jabba's palace at the beginning of Return of the Jedi. It could be added to the article and the redirect kept, or it could be deleted as the detail is too trivial, and the name "Boussh" is not stated in the film. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Given this is also a misspelling, input on whether it merits a redirect would be appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:53, 8 October 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).

Burin en-bec-de-flute

[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! 02:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "en-bec-de-flute" at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod En-bec-de-flute is not bec-de-flute. Should this be moved to Burin bec-de-flute then? I've brought it here purposefully because I prefer it deleted (and still do as long as there's no mention of "en-bec-de-flute"), especially not inserting it to a page using only a Google search result as a reference URL, as it has been done so. But at least there is added content to warrant a Bec-de-flute target, so I'll thank you for improving the pedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at google the term is used in different formations. Yes, a different redirect should probably set up, or a few. Johnbod (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That Google search is not a proper reference. Here is one that looks promising, but I need to get to other things and can't pursue this further at the moment.

Heizer, Robert F., and Harper Kelley. “Burins and Bladelets in the Cessac Collection from Santa Cruz Island, California.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 106, no. 2, 1962, pp. 94–105. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/985375. Accessed 20 Sept. 2024.

LadyofShalott 13:09, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a proper reference, but by all means add another. I'm not sure there isn't a difference between Old and New World defnitions. Johnbod (talk) 13:39, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - It looks like that whole section of the article is in major need of expansion (I've now tagged it as such), but the term does appear to be valid and this is the unambiguous target, so keep. Fieari (talk) 07:28, 9 October 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).

January 1, 2003

[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 15:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Per #7 October 2023 below, cc Utopes. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@1234qwer1234qwer4:, do you know how many others like this are out there? I definitely misspoke in my previous nomination. I was thinking this in the previous nomination, but honestly, it might be nice to create a category for "date redirects" to easily monitor and maintain the targets of these and similar titles, but I wasn't sure the total scope and how many of such redirects exist at this time. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Utopes, I've bundled the remaining four redirects into this nomination. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Upon looking through the histories of these and other discussions, I am not surprised all of these have been nominated at RfD before, including from myself. As an example, for May 5th 2020, which was discussed here in this 2021 discussion, Tavix was involved in the RfD, and cited 06/06/06 as being a "past precedent" of targeting Portal pages. However 06/06/06 no longer points at the Portalspace (it targets 2006#June), so the argument of precedent in that situation falls flat. The other early discussion in 2017 for October 10, 2010, was closed as NO consensus, implying that it is not a consensus. (This situation was no consensus to target away from Portal space, but was later followed by a subsequent RfD in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 1#April 9, 2011, where there was no consensus to target TO portal space, which cited and was cited by the previous "no consensus" result in both.)
For the remaining two dates in January 2023, I nominated them here under the premise that there is no mainspace coverage for these dates, and wished for them to be deleted. Jay requested my comment towards Tavix's proposal of retargeting to Portal space, (which I would have otherwise disagreed with due to no substantial & lasting precedent of individual dates sticking around for long at portal targets) and 14 minutes later the discussion was closed by Rosguill as retarget. The fact that these have all been to RfD before on multiple occasions each implies that there is some level of disagreement and NOT a set-in-stone precedent on what to do, especially when titles such as January 6th, 2021 (which, upon re-examining, actually has a different target than January 6 2021, and 1/6/21 and 1/6/2021), which (all) imply to readers that typing in a date into the mainspace search-bar will result in a mainspace outcome. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to January 2003. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 20:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for the others; they should also be retargeted to their respective year/month articles in main space. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 20:29, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find it more likely that someone going to Wikipedia to search a date is likely trying to find encyclopedic content in mainspace, related to the date they inputted into Wikipedia. Not a list of WikiProject-handpicked stories that happened that day. If someone wants to know "what happened on January 2nd, 2003", they'd ask a Google Search for a more summative assessment. What do you mean by "creating the rest"? Utopes (talk / cont) 05:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The portal does in fact link to encyclopedic content in mainspace related to that day. I'm not sure why you think a Google search would give a more summative assessment, that's rather-famously the major downside to Google searches—they dump an assortment of results that may or may not be useful. (So much so that Google has begun to give AI summaries in an effort to be more useful to someone who wants a quick answer...) On the other hand, a curated list of encyclopedic events is much more useful to someone wanting to know what happened on a given day. And the fact that they are curated by a 'project' of Wikipedia editors is even better because these are people who are experienced with this task. -- Tavix (talk) 13:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 00:22, 8 October 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_October_8&oldid=1254470809"