This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will automatically hide itself when the backlog is cleared.

Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page · Archives

Shortcuts WP:RFD WP:RfD

Deletion discussions
Deletion today Undeletion Deletion review Deletion log Request a copy of a deleted article
Articles
today all (sorted) closing log
Templates and modules
today all closing holding log
Files
today all closing log
Categories
today all category closing log speedy working manual
Redirects
today all closing log
Miscellany
today all closing log
Speedy deletion
candidates
Proposed deletion
all (sorted) BLPs
Policy Process Guide (Images) Administrator guidelines
v t e

XFD backlog

V	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Total
CfD	0	0	0	94	94
TfD	0	0	1	1	2
MfD	0	0	0	1	1
FfD	0	0	2	22	24
RfD	0	0	0	39	39
AfD	0	0	0	10	10

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

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

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

Before listing a redirect for discussion

[edit]

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

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

The guiding principles of RfD

[edit]

Shortcut

• WP:RGUIDE

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

When should a redirect be deleted?

[edit]

This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirect/Deletion reasons. (edit | history)

Shortcuts

• WP:RFD#HARMFUL
• WP:RFD?

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

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

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

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

Reasons for deleting

[edit]

Shortcut

• WP:RFD#DELETE

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

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

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

    • WP:RETURNTORED
    If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.
11. If the redirect ends in "(disambiguation)" but does not target a disambiguation page or a page performing a disambiguation-like function (such as a set index of articles). Speedy deletion criterion G14 may apply.

Reasons for not deleting

[edit]

Shortcut

• WP:RFD#KEEP

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

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

Neutrality of redirects

[edit]

Shortcut

• WP:RNEUTRAL

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

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

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

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

Closing notes

[edit]

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

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

How to list a redirect for discussion

[edit]

Shortcut

• WP:RFDHOWTO

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

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

This version of the page may not reflect the most current changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes.

• 1957-58 Australia rugby union tour of the Britain Isles, Ireland and France → 1957–58 Australia rugby union tour of Britain, Ireland and France  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The error "Britain Isles" is implausible. This was created by a pagemove, but not a longstanding one — in 2009 someone moved 1957-58 Australia rugby union tour of Britain, Ireland and France to this title, and it was reverted just two days later. Nyttend (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep From a misspelling Servite et contribuere (talk) 02:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Obviously created in error but ineligible for speedy deletion due to the above keep recommendation. Thryduulf (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, someone could accidentally and mindlessly type "Isles", it is not very implausible. Easternsahara (talk) 17:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. If someone were to add "Isles" mindlessly, it would be "British Isles". Jay 💬 02:14, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 02:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Judge Bridlegoose → Pantagruel (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Enwiki has no mention at all of "Judge Bridlegoose". The current target is not suitable, even if the current proposed deletion is declined. Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to Gargantua and Pantagruel#The Third Book. Based on s:The Third Book, Bridlegoose is a character in the novel, so it may be helpful to the casual reader. Sdrqaz (talk) 04:36, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The target has been deleted. Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:22, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Criticism of Dunkin' Donuts → Dunkin' Donuts#Criticism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such section is contained at the target. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:55, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Schützenpanzer: This link was broken because Guacpocalypse renamed this section from "Criticism" to "News." I have fixed this broken section anchor, so the link is working again. Jarble (talk) 00:06, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Buds (Surf Curse album) → Freaks (Surf Curse song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Article failed notability and reputable sources; instead of deletion was redirected causing misleading links Fredlesaltique (talk) 20:49, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I've played these games before! → Squid Game season 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The phrase isn't mentioned at the target article and there isn't another article which would be suitable for retargeting. Suonii180 (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the redirect to something else where it is mentioned which I also put in the article, It was Squid Game season 2 to Squid Game season 2#Episodes. Rafael Gauden R. Maglalang (talk) 00:50, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is mentioned at episode 3 "001" if you can not find it. Rafael Gauden R. Maglalang (talk) 00:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The lowercase makes the target surprising. Since there isn't much information on shish at skewer (the article is too broad), I think that retargeting to shish kebab (page view comparison) would provide the most information and be the most intuitive for readers. Alternatives include swapping with Shish (disambiguation). Sdrqaz (talk) 00:24, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wokepedia → Criticism of Wikipedia#Partisanship  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Wokepedia" or "Wokipedia" is not mentioned in the target article. The only thing I know is one of Elon Musk's posts (i.e. tweets) on X [twitter] joking about giving financial compensation if the Wikimedia foundation changes wikipedia to wokepedia (but my statement is completely unsourced and will need searching). Chuterix (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bitterzoet → Eefje de Visser  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is redirecting for a less relevant topic. Most of the links are relating to the venue, not the album. Dutch language has no article for the album, but an article for the venue. Should at best be disambiguated, but I would suggest deleting. Fazzo29 (talk) 09:13, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly contribute to nl:wiki and am therefore not familiar with the policies or conventions of en:wiki. But I agree with @Fazzo29 that it doesn't seem logical to redirect 'Bitterzoet' to Eefje de Visser (a Dutch artist who has an album + title song named Bitterzoet). The Dutch Wikipedia article Bitterzoet is a disambiguation page which lists 7 meanings, four of which have their own article on nl:wiki. Michzondag (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]

• Automatic lubricating cup → Lubricant  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Automatic Lubricating Cup → Lubricant  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This phrase, and specifically the word "cup", is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving it unclear why readers would be redirected to the target article when searching these terms. Steel1943 (talk) 07:17, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep since it's an important invention with lots of coverage in sources. It has good possibilities for a section, or even an article, but at least a mention. Better to fix the lack of mention than to delete it. Dicklyon (talk) 15:13, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  ...Something being that notable seems to be eligible for WP:REDLINK if it's not mentioned. Steel1943 (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep but Retarget per Mdewman6 below. Dicklyon (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Automatic lubricator#Displacement lubricator for now, and add a mention. This seems to refer to patented invention by Elijah McCoy, known as The real McCoy; both articles mention his "oil-drip cup invention", but the best target would be the article describing the invention and related things, not the inventor or terms derived from the invention. There is old content at Automatic Lubricating Cup but it would definitely be a case of WP:TNT if brought to AfD, as it is more about McCoy than the invention. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:20, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom until a mention can be established. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Elijah McCoy for now, since the invention is by him. Not prejudiced to redirecting if a mention gets added to another article. ApexParagon (talk) 15:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Multiple targets have been suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:49, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

This redirect performs no useful function. The target is a surname SIA and does not require a WP:INTDAB redirect.WP:G14 declined by @Pppery: with edit summary "A surname article is a page that "perform[s] disambiguation-like functions (such as set index articles or lists)." IMO so G14 doesn't apply. Probably should be deleted at RfD". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Alberta separatism and annexationism → Alberta separatism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete - Implausible search target; redirects to a shorter title; created from an inappropriate page move; NPOV violation. ―"Ghost of Dan Gurney" _(hihi) 15:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The target is about movements both for independence (separatism) and annexation by the United States (annexationsim) so it's not misleading and doesn't seem implausible. The title length is irrelevant and I'm not understand why you claim this is an NPOV violation? Even it if is non-neutral, it's important to note that redirects do not have to be neutral. Thryduulf (talk) 16:14, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete on the basis, that the redirect was part of a unexplained move and the article is 97% not on annexationism compared to other articles, so agree largely implausible. Alberta annexationism would redirect readers to the more relevant article. DankJae 22:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The redirect implies that the current target covers both topics, thus hiding the existence of the section to which Alberta annexationism currently redirects. Nyttend (talk) 07:02, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:28, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There's been a murder → Taggart  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

When I search this phrase, mostly what comes up is a card game and a Jay-Z song. I'll admit, my searches from the US might not come up with Taggart due to it being a Scottish show, but I still think this is far from unambiguous. I added {{R from quote}} if it is kept though. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment My searches from the UK are a roughly equal mix of Taggart and the card game, with Jay-Z not getting a single hit on the first four pages (I stopped looking at that point). We have no content about the card game that I've found, but there is an EP and a TV episode with this title, both references to Taggart (The Gresham Flyers#Extended plays, Dear Green Place#Season 1). Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MouseCursor ^{or a keyboard?} 08:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong redirect. Vampyrellidium is a genus of probably-nuclearid, mentioned as "not to be confused with the cercozoan Vampyrella" in https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6792443/. Artoria2e5 🌉 07:13, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Subst:Unsigned IP → Template:Unsigned IP  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Template:Subst:Unsigned → Template:Unsigned  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'm not even sure how you would use this template shortcut? I guess Template:Subst:Unsigned IP works, but the "normal" way you would display this would be {{subst:unsigned IP}}, which works regardless of this shortcut's existence. I think this can be deleted due to its dubious utility and potential for confusion about what the subst: prefix means. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 05:21, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't think anyone would choose to write {{subst:subst:Unsigned IP}}. Besides, it looks like a double redirect; Template:Unsigned IP redirects to Template:Unsigned. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 06:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, and Also delete Template:Subst:Unsigned: As far as I can tell, the user who created these was correctly using {{subst:Unsigned}} and {{subst:Unsigned IP}}, but using edit summaries that attempted to link Template:subst:Unsigned and Template:subst:Unsigned IP (ref). But then, immediately after creating the redirects, they switched to just using {{Unsigned}} and {{Unsigned IP}} (e.g. Special:Diff/1199770620). Anomie⚔ 13:32, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with deleting TM:Subst:Unsigned; added to nomination. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 18:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:NEWSCIENTIST → Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#New Scientist  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect used to lead to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#New Scientist. The target section has since been deleted, and now it only links to the top of the page, which is not very helpful. The New Scientist section either needs to be restored, or the redirect deleted. Since I don't know why New Scientist was removed from the list of perennial sources, I am unsure of what my opinion on this would be. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 04:57, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The RSP entry was removed two years ago.[1] If a new entry is added then the redirect can be recreated, but it's redundant at the moment. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 09:47, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Asie Mineure → Anatolia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think Anatolia is especially French. Delete per WP:FORRED. Duckmather (talk) 04:33, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Also known as Asia Minor and Asie Mineure is the French translation. So keep as unambiguous and harmless Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:59, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Patrick McDermott → Disappearance of Patrick McDermott  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The disambiguation page was previously proposed for deletion. Probably best to discuss the redirect first to see if we actually agree with it in the first place. Also, I know he was the partner of Olivia Newton-John which is the main factor of his notability, but I still think I discussion is best to determine whether to Keep or Dabify and move Patrick McDermott (disambiguation) to Patrick McDermott without a disambiguation Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:20, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dance drama → Wuju  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are many types of dance drama, not just wuju. This is misleading. Either delete, retarget, or possibly a DAB? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see quite a few results for "dance drama" on this site, so I'm inclined to suggest a DAB or something similar. Seems like a reasonable enough search term that I could believe leading to the current target (given it's a direct translation of the name) or a number of other options, so some sort of list would make the most sense. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Only reason I didn't DAB at creation was that we didn't seem to have any articles on the other genres of dance drama. Since WP:DAB requires at least two valid target articles, I went the redirect route. If we do have articles on these other forms of dance drama, a DAB definitely makes more sense.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Monopoly: The Card Game → Monopoly (game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I originally redirected this to Monopoly (game) because it failed notability guidelines for products and services, and was filled with original research. The target article used to have some substantive coverage of the topic, but I removed it because it was unreliably sourced. Therefore, this redirect serves no navigational purpose and should be deleted. (There is now only a trivial mention on the target page, though, and some disambiguation pages still have it listed.) 1isall (talk) 02:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant policies, guidelines, and revisions that I forgot to link to:

• WP:PRODUCT
• WP:NOR
• The revision of the redirected article before I decided to redirect it (I initially proposed the deletion, but withdrew it and chose to redirect it instead.)
• Revision of the target article with the unreliably sourced mention of the topic before I removed it

1isall (talk) 02:53, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to History of Monopoly, where it is mentioned. If sources are discovered in the future, the article can be restored from this version, which will be easier to do than if the edit history is deleted. Pinging User:Cunard to see if more sources can be found at this time. BOZ (talk) 07:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for that recommendation, BOZ. However, in the article History of Monopoly, the only mention of Monopoly: The Card Game appears in the section History of Monopoly#Localizations, licenses, and spin-offs as a single, passing reference. It's not substantive and lacks a citation. I believe the redirect would therefore be unsuitable for retargeting there. 1isall (talk) 02:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Better Go Home → DJ Khaled  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Song does not appear to exist. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:54, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Prashant Sharma → IIT (ISM) Dhanbad#Controversies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. The unrelated Prashant Sharma (politician) exists, so maybe delete and move that article over the redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and move with a hatnote to Prashant P. Sharma per nom. मल्ल (talk) 17:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  DABIFY Per Tavix Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The pre-redirect content with the attempt for an article on a YouTuber by an editor who was later blocked, was removed within 10 minutes as non-notable, and it was unsourced as well. Jay 💬 14:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate. I don't see a primary topic between Prashant Sharma (politician) and Prashant P. Sharma. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Is a seperate disambig page necessary if there's only two articles? There's already a natural disambiguation with the article titles and the page for the politician consistently receives over double the monthly views. मल्ल (talk) 01:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft:Jam doughnuts → Jelly doughnut  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I attempted nominating this for speedy deletion but it was declined. I do not feel it is necessary to have a redirect from the draft namespace, especially since the non-draft namespace version of this redirect exists and also redirects the same way. It is incredibly improbable someone would ever keyword the draft namespace to find information on a topic—the casual reader doesn’t even realize Wikipedia is more than article space. The draft was also originally created by a troll who was blocked indefinitely, before another user changed it into a redirect. Thebirdlover (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ugh. Just delete this per WP:NOTBURO, WP:G6, or what have you. It was a duplicate created by a not-here user, and a redirect at the same title already exists in main space. And for some bizarre reason, you can't even let draft space redirects get cleaned up in six months by G13. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:50, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Believe me, if I was an administrator I would, don't act like everyone on Wikipedia has those powers. Draft space redirects shouldn't exist in my opinion--why delay something that can be done now? --Thebirdlover (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I was just addressing Wikipedia at large, not you specifically. I wasn't expecting you to do any of this, but rather the result of this discussion, which shouldn't really be necessary, but sometimes the bureaucracy wins out. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as completely harmless. This discussion has caused far more disruption and wasted far more editor time than anything else to do with this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  In what way does keeping it prevent further disruption and wasted time versus deleting it? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Misleading, in the implication that there was a real draft at this title that editors could draw from. --BDD (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Move without redirect to Jam doughnuts. I assume this editor was trying to create a redirect at this title but couldn't due to not being autoconfirmed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Thryduulf and move as per Tavix. Some pretty awesome usernames, btw. Hyperbolick (talk) 03:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you support moving with or without a redirect? Cremastra (u — c) 22:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Move WITH redirect to Jam doughnuts. The leftover redirect will then be a {{R avoided double redirect}}, akin to getting a draft redirect "published". Steel1943 (talk) 19:54, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

According to the redirect, Diplonemea is monotypic, but according to the new Discoba classification template, it isn't, for it also contains Hemistasidae and Eupelagonemidae. I would especially like turning the page into an article, for this taxon, according to the aforementioned template, is not monotypic. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 20:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Road travel → Road trip  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Since the target article is specifically for traveling on roads via cars and other automobiles, this redirect targeting the current article can be seen as potentially misleading. Roads can also be traveled on by walking, bicycles, and other beans types of non-motorized vehicles. Steel1943 (talk) 18:05, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I would ask for some examples of these other non-motorised vehicles, but we have a well-regarded essay discouraging that ;) Thryduulf (talk) 22:58, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  ...Geez, I didn't realize I made that hilarious error. Fixed. 🤣 Steel1943 (talk) 02:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Road transport, in the absence of a separate article this seems the best bet. For comparison Rail travel redirects to Rail transport, Air travel and Aviation (where Air transport redirects) are separate articles. Equivalents for travel on water all seem to be redlinks rather than articles or redirects to the ... transport articles. Thryduulf (talk) 23:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Change target to Road Transport per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Gender pronoun → Personal pronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender pronouns → Personal pronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender specific pronoun → Gender neutrality in languages with gendered third-person pronouns  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender specific pronouns → Gender neutrality in languages with gendered third-person pronouns  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender-specific pronoun → Preferred gender pronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gender-specific pronouns → Preferred gender pronoun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Personal_pronoun#Gender, where preferred gender pronouns is already hatnoted. --MikutoH ^talk! 17:49, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Chip Whitley → Conan O'Brien  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Did a google search, and Conan O'Brien wasn't mentioned for Chip Whitley searches. Appears to be fake. It is in page history of him having to do something with the actor. Don't know if the actor is notable enough or whether this redirect is legit or is fake. The user that created this also created a fake one called Dora The Ex-Toader. I think either Delete as one option, second option would be Draftify and crate article on actor or another one would be Keep. I am honestly neutral and I should let people who know about this and what it means debate and argue. Servite et contribuere (talk) 17:46, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Traveler-oriented business → Travel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be ambiguous to a point where there is no adequate target for this redirect. Some examples of targets this redirect could refer are Travel agency and almost any article about a subject that assists travelers (air, bus, train, etc.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning delete for no good target. I wouldn't expect to find articles about modes of transport from this search term, but rather an article about the business sector aimed at travellers and tourists/tourism - travel agencies, tour operators, tourist information centres, Corporate travel management, that sort of thing. However we don't have an article on that I can find tourism sector is a redlink for example (Tourism sector in Iran is the only similar title to exist, but that's obviously not a suitable target here). Businesses provided services to the travelling communities (e.g. Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people (UK)), but I'd be very surprised if that was the primary topic but would definitely merit a hatnote or dab entry if we have an article. I support disambiguation in principle but I'm not sure it would be viable since I've failed to find articles that match the scope of pretty much everything I've thought of this could refer to. Thryduulf (talk) 23:14, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Interstate 90 floating bridges (disambiguation) → Interstate 90 floating bridges  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect performs no useful function. The target "Interstate 90 floating bridges" (plural) is not ambiguous. The target is a simple list and does not require a WP:INTDAB redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

This redirect serves no useful purpose. The target is not a disambiguation page (and so does not need a WP:INTDAB redirect to it), and does not otherwise list articles that might be titled "Häme" (because Häme is not ambiguous). Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Make into a new disambiguation page. Häme and Tavastia (historical province) are about the same topic (there is a merge discussion), but there is also Häme Province, Häme (constituency) and Häme Region (present-day Kanta-Häme, but known as Häme before 1998). Jähmefyysikko (talk) 08:23, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Lobotomy Dash → Geometry Dash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, because it is not mentioned in the target article. Xoontor (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete while unmentioned. There is a lot of material about this on google searches (it seems to be some sort of meme/derivative of Geometry Dash) so while I haven't investigated the reliability or depth of sourcing, I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of content about it was added somewhere at some point. However unless and until that happens the redirect is not misleading. Thryduulf (talk) 13:28, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Superman 'Starman' → Starman (song)#Social Media  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete per WP:UNNATURAL (Titles with punctuation, obscure errors, additions, or removals that have no specific affinity to one title over any other: e.g. being in quotations). Xoontor (talk) 12:30, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

after renaming, now misleading Estopedist1 (talk) 12:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Visnapuu (disambiguation) just to be deleted, and then everything OK--Estopedist1 (talk) 12:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I think so too; it should be deleted. Qaswa (talk) 18:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep since simply put, the nominated redirect is not eligible for WP:G14 since list pages serve a "disambiguation-like function". Steel1943 (talk) 18:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Unambiguous and from unnecessary disambiguation Servite et contribuere (talk) 03:40, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• San diego crash → 2008 San Diego F/A-18 crash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Created by a blocked user; the wording in the title is too ambiguous to identify any single target, dab page, or category. 2600:8800:1E8F:BE00:B3B1:93FA:7153:FC17 (talk) 03:15, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete highly ambiguous, many crashes -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 07:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as ambiguous. The alternative would be to dabify, though we don't usually make dab pages for crashes. A very quick search identifies the following potential targets: Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182, 2008 San Diego F/A-18 crash, 1959 San Diego F3H crash, 2025 San Diego Cessna Citation II crash, and there are bound to be others. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Dab would need to be created at San Diego crash, and there's no real point in keeping a miscapitalized redirect to there if it doesn't already exist. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• You'll Be Alright, Kid (Chapter 2) → Ordinary (Alex Warren song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Found no news coverage of this release, and it is not mentioned at the target or at Alex Warren. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:28, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Knick Knack Paddy Whack → List of The 7D episodes#ep11b  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Knick-Knack Paddywhack → This Old Man  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Nick Nack Paddy Whack → This Old Man  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Nick Nack Paddy Wack → This Old Man  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I used the first of these to look up information about the nursery rhyme and was surprised to arrive at an episode listing for a show I've never heard of. Following the (not particularly prominent) link to the article I wanted I found that multiple other spellings (indeed all the variations I've found) link directly there. While the term I used is the exact title of the episode, I don't see evidence of it being the primary topic and it being the only one going to a different target also feels wrong. I propose to regarget Knick Knack Paddy Whack to This Old Man to match the others. Thryduulf (talk) 02:21, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom. Cremastra (u — c) 03:02, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget. There's already a hatnote to the TV episode at This Old Man -- œ^™ 06:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:43, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Marilyn ricecup → Mary Lynn Rajskub  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I guess it's supposed to be a mishearing of the name, but it just seems like an unfunny joke. Putting it in quotes on Google returns no results. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete If this is a joke then I must've missed the humor completely. Nathannah • 📮 01:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely misspelling/search term. Some Google results came up for "Marilyn rice cup", but not nearly enough to be convincing. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ambiguous term, no evidence that the current target is primary topic. It is after all the historic name for the Ljubljanica river. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I was initially inclined to agree and recommend disambiguation, since the bar for a surname redirecting to an individual should be high, and the composer is not especially well known. However, there are only two topics involved, and looking beyond the two articles themselves, every current use refers to the composer. Thus, I recommend keeping and adding {{redirect|Leybach|the river|Ljubljanica}} as a hatnote on the composer's article. --BDD (talk) 15:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• disambiguate per nom -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 07:42, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• To amend Public Law 93-435 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, providing parity with Guam, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa (S. 256; 113th Congress) → Public Law 113-34  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Egregiously long title. Nobody's going to enter the long title and then follow it up with (S. 256; 113th Congress); the long title is sufficiently unambiguous. Because this was bot-created as a redirect to an alternate form of the title (which I'm nominating separately), there's no reason to be concerned about deleting any history. Nyttend (talk) 21:30, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep accurate and unambiguous. Nothing in the nomination statement is a reason to delete a redirect that is harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Opinion polling for the next Canadian federal election → Opinion polling for the 2025 Canadian federal election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Since 2025 is no longer the next election and we have no article on polling for the actual next election, this redirect is misleading and should be deleted. Cremastra (u — c) 22:35, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dora the Ex-Toader → Dora the Explorer (TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to be a fake nickname/vandalism that's been uncaught since 2009 Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom: not a thing. Cremastra (u — c) 22:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not even close to funny. Nathannah • 📮 23:36, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. Total vandalism name that is completely fake Servite et contribuere (talk) 01:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Webi Ughasate → Maqdi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is there such a thing? Doug Weller talk 19:25, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, apparently not. My apologies for only relying on its mention in the target when responding to the request at WP:AFC/R. Sam Sailor 20:01, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sam Sailor Should this be considered a G7 request? In either case, Delete per the above. Cremastra (u — c) 22:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Of all sports teams with redirects that may refer to something else, I would question this one the most. The top of the Los Angeles Chargers article says "Chargers redirect here. For other uses see Charger (disambiguation) not Chargers (disambiguation)" and Charger (disambiguation) is a redirect to Chargers. Chargers could also refer to the Deccan Chargers, the Gold Coast Chargers, and outside of sports; Battery Chargers. I would suggest changing target to Charger. Note that 49ers currently redirects to 49er and they are a way more notable team. I might still consider discussing the redirect (Even if this one is kept) just to see whether people think change should happen considering the discussion was 10 years ago). Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Charger per nom. 162 etc. (talk) 16:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to "Charger" as highly ambiguous -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 07:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The click data doesn't really show lots of readers (being confused) going from Los Angeles Chargers to Charger.[2]—Bagumba (talk) 07:33, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Football Cardinals → Arizona Cardinals  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Football Cardinals is actually used in St. Louis and the Baseball team was the Primary Topic. When in St. Louis, the team was commonly referred to as the "Football Cardinals" to avoid confusion with the Baseball team. And "Football Cardinals" is mentioned on the article St. Louis Cardinals (NFL). Change target to St. Louis Cardinals (NFL) and leave redirect note at top of article. Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, this moniker is never used when discussing the post-move Arizona team. 162 etc. (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Horse shampoo → Shampoo#Animal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, horses are not mentioned in the target article. -1ctinus📝🗨 14:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Make dab; see also Subcompact crossover SUV and Subcompact executive car. 162 etc. (talk) 03:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an ambiguous WP:PTM, or weak keep and create Subcompact (disambiguation) with the terms stated by the nominator ... but with the caveat that the current target of the nominated redirect is most likely the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT topic. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There are a lot of incoming links. The ones at Mini MPV look like they should be changed. I haven't checked enough of the incoming links to comment on patterns. Jruderman (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Texas Oil → Texaco  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It was never known as "Texas Oil". I have just created an article titled Oil in Texas which I am working on and am going to consider inviting other editors to work on and might even consider splitting content from other articles and move the content to Oil in Texas. Oil in Texas is notable enough for a stand alone article and might even collaborate with other editors to move content from Energy in Texas to Oil in Texas. Back to this redirect, I think for now it is best to change target to Oil in Texas. Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Oil in Texas A company named Texaco is not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the redirect. So, it is more necessary to retarget to more appropriate title. 103.144.14.10 (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• A-League → A-League Men  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not the only league called A-League anymore. I would say to either change target to Australian Professional Leagues or to Dabify or maybe less likely create and article or merge the articles A-League Men and A-League Women and call the article A-Leagues (It would require removing the existing redirect of A-Leagues. Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:01, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It never was the only league known as the A-League (we had American Professional Soccer League and USL First Division). The question is primary topic or not. Anyways, I'd suggest redirecting A-League to A-League (disambiguation). --SuperJew (talk) 08:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot there was already a DAB page. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, the dabpage would move to A-League in order to avoid unnecessary disambiguation in the title. Is this really a WP:NOPRIMARY situation though? 162 etc. (talk) 15:50, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Chinese invasion of Taiwan → Chinese unification#Official stance of the People's Republic of China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Notable topic on its own; the term is not mentioned in the target article. PS. Found a better redirect target: Cross-strait_relations#Possibility_of_a_Chinese_invasion. _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 06:31, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Change Target to Cross-strait_relations#Possibility_of_a_Chinese_invasion Per nominator Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is purely speculative and amounts to WP:CRYSTAL China has not invaded Taiwan. A redirect to a very speculative sounding sub-section of a different article is compounding the issue, not making it better. Simonm223 (talk) 11:19, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would actually disagree. It has been widely reported by the media of a possibility. This is not a case of an editor publishing their own speculations. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's like suggesting we don't need World War IV (and World War III :P) _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 15:41, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hanyangprofessor2 Good point, but a Chinese invasion of Taiwan only needs one state to invade one state. WW3 would need the almost whole world involved. WW4 would have to wait for WW3 to end and possibly even at least 20 years after that war to end. Servite et contribuere (talk) 15:53, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Servite et contribuere No comparison is ideal, true. See some related discussion here. _{Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here} 07:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment China has invaded Taiwan before... Transition from Ming to Qing ... the Ming invaded in the 1660s and the Qing invaded in the 1680s -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 07:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above, a very plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 13:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Collapose bottom → Template:Collapse bottom  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Template:Collapose top → Template:Collapse top  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Also an implausible typo (and typos in templatespace are generally deleted much more aggressively). C.f. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 20#Template:Collapsoe bottom. Duckmather (talk) 05:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 23:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Vogue india cover → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Vogue india cover girl → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Vogue india cover girls → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Vogue india cover model → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Vogue india cover models → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Vogue india covers → List of Vogue India cover models  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete all redirects, unnecessary and implausible search terms. Jayediting (talk) 00:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CHEAP, does not seem implausible. 162 etc. (talk) 15:51, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per 162 etc. Servite et contribuere (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per 162 etc. These all seem plausible and unambiguous search terms. Thryduulf (talk) 13:23, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Men Gone Their Own Way → Men Going Their Own Way  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible search term, only used in a handful of self-published sources that I could find, i.e. a novel or very obscure synonym per WP:RDELETE —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep seems a fairly basic and straightforward derivation from the original title. This is nowhere near novel because gone and going are obviously related. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:16, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per PARAKANYAA Servite et contribuere (talk) 07:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete an implausible search term that is only used by self-published sources is not something likely to have any utility for readers. Simonm223 (talk) 11:18, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this strikes me as a very plausible misremembering of the article title so I'm not concerned by limited use in sources. Thryduulf (talk) 13:24, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bishara Bahbah → Massad Boulos  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Subject of redirect is largely unrelated to the target, causing confusion. The subject is only mentioned twice in two sentences of the target. Liu1126 (talk) 22:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The only mentions are in passing and nowhere close to being a useful redirect target. Thryduulf (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

• Red-green flag → Flag of Belarus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous, there are many red-green flags. Rrjmrrr (talk) 21:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty, fair enough. Burkina Faso, Madagascar, Morocco, could have this name too. Arguably, Pridnestrovie and Mauritania could have it too. Looks like unless I'm missing someone the rest are green-red (the reverse of this title). Maybe someone can make a convincing argument; like for example Belarus is probably the one people would look for if they wanted a "red-green flag" (which doesn't seem very stable... maybe when used it turns out to be better than expected?)? Until then, redirect. Whoops. wikipedia-kxeon  mailbox ... 21:47, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of flags by color combination#Red, green Servite et contribuere (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of flags by color combination#Red, green which lists multiple flags with this combination of colours (in either order) including Bangladesh and Portugal which were my first thoughts. It doesn't include Belarus however, which listed in the White, red, green section. Thryduulf (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of flags by color combination#Red, green per Thryduulf. Flag of Belarus is not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the redirect. 103.111.102.118 (talk) 08:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of flags by color combination#Red, green, per those above. BD2412 T 01:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Apparently "a redirect from a page name in one of the Tibetan languages", this is not mentioned at the target, and is ambiguous with Dr.I Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:FORRED. While I'm not sure how ambiguous it really is with the WWI aircraft in practice, and there is some affinity between yaks and Tibetan, it is also an unrelated word in several other languages and the lack of mention means there is a high chance of confusion. Thryduulf (talk) 23:15, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to DRI (a dab page) since 3-letter terms are generally ambiguous anyways. Duckmather (talk) 05:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• retarget per Duckmather -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 07:08, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:DPROCESS → Wikipedia:Deletion process  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I originally put up this redirect for it to be a shortcut to the deletion process page because the page had no main shortcut, but now, the main shortcut to this page is "WP:DELPRO", which sounds much better than "WP:DPROCESS". Furthermore, WP:D stands for Wikipedia:Disambiguation, which could be confusing to someone trying to look up how to create disambiguations, thinking that they are going to find the "Disambiguation process". I could have just requested speedy deletion per WP:G7, but I'll let the community decide whether the redirect should be deleted, kept or retargeted. RaschenTechner (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for those who wish to use this shortcut, which would be available for use whether or not it's one of the advertised shortcuts. Personally, I like DPROCESS better than DELPRO (which to me sounds more like someone in favor of deletion). There is no page for Wikipedia:Disambiguation process, so I don't see ambiguity as an issue. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:33, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as a WP:G7. When I saw this in the TOC, I thought it was for something akin to 'due process' instead. It's only been here a few weeks and is unused. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Speedy deletion isn't an option since Tavix voted for something other than deletion. Steel1943 (talk) 18:30, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I agree with Tavix. I can find only three pages in the Wikipedia namespace that start with "D" and include the word "process" in the title: Wikipedia:Deletion process, Wikipedia:Decision Making Process (marked as a historical project page, but essentially just an essay from 2002), and Wikipedia:Don't just ignore the process (a humorous essay) and this is a plausible shortcut for only one of them - the current one. Thryduulf (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]