Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Administrator instructions

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, you need 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. Put a request to Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests.
  • 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.

Contents

Before listing a redirect for discussion

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

The guiding principles of RfD

  • The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at a "Search results 1–10 out of 378" result 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 has no discussion, 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 we delete a redirect?

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

  • a redirect may contain nontrivial edit history;
  • if a redirect is reasonably old (or a redirect is created as a result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is quite possible that its deletion will break links in old, historical versions of some other articles—such an event is very difficult to envision and even detect.

Note that there could exist (for example), links to the URL "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorneygate" anywhere on the Internet. If so, then those links might not show up by checking for (clicking on) "WhatLinksHere for Attorneygate"—since those links might come from somewhere outside Wikipedia.

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

Reasons for deleting

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", 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 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, are an exception to this rule. (Note "WP:" redirects are in the Wikipedia namespace, WP: being an alias for Wikipedia:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply in some cases.)
  7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to itself or to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8, though you should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first.
  8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects from a foreign language title 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 it needs to be deleted to make way for move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion. If not, take the article to Requested Moves.
  10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.

Reasons for not deleting

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 the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links.
  3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, if someone sees the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but does not know what that refers to, then he or she will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
  4. You risk breaking incoming or internal links by deleting the redirect. 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 and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. 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. The pageviews tool can also provide evidence of outside utility.
  6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.
  7. The redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and deleting the redirect would prevent unregistered users from expanding the redirect, and thereby make the encyclopedia harder to edit and reduce the pool of available editors. (Unregistered users cannot create new pages in the mainspace; they can only edit existing pages, including redirects, which they can expand.) This criterion does not apply to redirects that are indefinitely semi-protected or more highly protected.

Neutrality of redirects

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names. Perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is therefore 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. ClimategateClimatic 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.

See also: Policy on which redirects can be deleted immediately.

Closing notes

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

I.
Tag the redirect.

  Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion, and enter }} at the very end. Example:

{{subst:rfd|content=#REDIRECT [[Foo]]{{R from move}}}}
  • 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.
  • 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
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.
III.
Notify users.

  It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors to the redirect that you are nominating the redirect.

To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the redirect. For convenience, the template

{{subst:RFDNote|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 redirect and use an edit summary such as:
Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]
  • 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.

Current list

February 20

Capital project Devision & Gandhinagar Road & Building Department

There is no content about the Capital project Division (or Devision) in article Gandhinagar. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

February 19

Zafari

Not in target PRehse (talk) 12:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Retarget There is an upcoming TV series that will likely become the primary topic. Meanwhile, I mentioned the series at Unreal engine#Zafari, so that's where the redirect should point for now.
"Zafari" is also the romanization of an Iranian surname, as well as part of several place names in Iran, but none of these currently necessitate disambiguation. Paradoctor (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete to create redlink for the TV series. Create disambiguation page if something else is primarily known as Zafari as the cities only include it as a PTM, and there's a single by Nacht und Nebel (band) called "Zafari". AngusWOOF (barksniff) 21:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • There's already a skeleton of an article in the page history that had a run-in with ClueBot. Deleting it in order to encourage creation of the same thing seems a bit counterproductive. —Xezbeth (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 22:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Rance Warlock

This re-direction page should be deleted. It was originally meant to target Kasson Crooker, which now has an article that does not mention the re-direction name, but was changed to target the video-game when the person's article was turned into a re-direction page. DaYL (talk) 22:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Final Fantasy XI locations

Fails WP:GAMECRUFT #7. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 21:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hang Tuah State

Hang Tuah State is not mention in the current target article, and Hang Tuah is not mentioned in the article either (aside from the see also section). Hang Tuah is probably a better target, and Malacca Sultanate does mention Hang Tuah, but without the word state. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 06:05, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 19:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Tomb Raider characters

No such list exists in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

List of recurring Tomb Raider characters

No such list mentioned in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Unclean vocals

Unsure where this phrase should redirect to. From the history, it has switched between redirecting to "death growl" and redirecting to "screaming (music)". It was later made into a disambiguation page, but I'm not sure if any of those results is a good idea. Natg 19 (talk) 06:58, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Screaming (music) may be okay as a synonym since Clean vocals was retargeted there. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Death growl. As I pointed out in my edit comments, Screaming (music) does not even mention the term "unclean" anywhere in the article, while Death growl lists "unclean vocals" as a bolded alternative title in the section "Terminology". A death growl is different from screaming and I've never encountered "screaming" as an umbrella term for all "ugly" forms of singing (in popular music, especially rock music), so "screaming" cannot be equated with (all) "unclean vocals". In fact, compared to a death growl, some forms listed in the article Screaming (music), such as shouted punk vocals, are considered "clean singing", because they may be gruff but easy enough to understand. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:34, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
It mentioned clean vocals in the lede after the last discussion, but that got taken out here. I'd support putting it back. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Black wood

The target article is a plant pathogen that causes "black wood of grapevine". This redirect however is far too vague and could describe any black-coloured wood, namely ebony. I don't think a dab page is justified since nothing is actually referred to as "black wood", as far as I can tell. Xezbeth (talk) 13:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

  • It just occurred to me that I could have redirected to Blackwood and problem solved. Oh well. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:32, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Pokemon/Pikachu

Implausible search term for someone to type in. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep There was a discussion seven years ago on this and others which ended no consensus. These are artifacts of very old pages and very old wikipedia (back when we had every pokemon). There's little harm in keeping them per WP:CHEAP and there could be 15 year old external links we're breaking for no reason. Basically, per Rossami and Nyttend. ~ Amory (utc) 02:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Pokemon/Charmander

Implausible search term. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep There was a discussion seven years ago on this and others which ended no consensus. These are artifacts of very old pages and very old wikipedia (back when we had every pokemon). There's little harm in keeping them per WP:CHEAP and there could be 15 year old external links we're breaking for no reason. Basically, per Rossami and Nyttend. ~ Amory (utc) 02:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Hastuon

Term not found in target article: no indication why this is a useful redirect. PamD 09:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

L'Affaire Russe

Term not mentioned in target article. Smacks of Recentism - Google books search finds the phrase in other historical contexts. If it's really a well-used term, please add to the target article. PamD 08:51, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Pork with garlic sauce

Too general a term to redirect to one specific dish. PamD 08:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

This two terms are exactly the same. I am a Chinese-born-Chinese and we eat this dish from elementary school. Lugiamale (talk) 10:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

But it's not the only dish involving pork with garlic sauce. Readers may be looking for another such dish and be SURPRISEd to find this specific one. --BDD (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Theoretically, there may be other pork dishes that have a garlic sauce, but does anyone have an example? I wasn't able to find anything else matching that description. Unless Wikipeida covers other dish(es) that can be described that way, I'm inclined to keep. -- Tavix (talk) 18:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Umm... OK I should make myself clearer. Sorry for the short response earlier. The reason why I make this item and make the redirect is that almost all of the Chinese restaurants in the US, especially in the Midwest area, translated Yuxiangrousi into Pork with Garlic Sauce. It doesn't make any sense, but a lot people would refer to the dish by this term as a consequence. So it would be pitiful if these people come to wiki but could not find anything about the dish, so I was trying to inform them the correct information. Lugiamale (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Howard Hinton

There is more than one person known as Howard Hinton. This redirect is to an article about Howard Everest Hinton. I wish to publish an article about Howard Hinton (no other given names, see Draft:Howard_Hinton) with target = Howard_Hinton. I have updated Hinton_(name) to reflect this. I do not think disambiguation is necessary in this case , and the redirect should be deleted. Perhaps the existing target article could be renamed Howard_Everest_Hinton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StedmanTriples (talkcontribs) 01:17, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

February 18

List of planets in the F-Zero series

There's no list of planets in the target article. Unnecessary redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Delphi Packard Electric Systems

Not mentioned in the target, so the reader is left none the wiser as to what Delphi Packard Electric Systems is or was, or how it relates or was related to Aptiv. There does appear to be an entity in existence today known as, or trading as, Delphi Packard (see for example this recent Romanian news article), but it's not clear whether that entity is, whether it's the same as or a part of Aptiv, or whether we have any encyclopaedic content relating to it. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 23:59, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No discussion took place, so I'm relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Yellow Light of Death (PS3)

Unnecessary disambiguation. Yellow Light of Death redirects to the same page and no other console has such an issue. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:16, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 17:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

TWIMEN

Unlikely search term. No sources found that this is being used as a shortcut name for this album. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep -
  1. Per WP:R#KEEP, "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do".
  2. Alleged confusion is not very plausible at all. So absent evidence of any harm there is no reason to delete.
  3. "There seems to be no evidence of confusion, just conjecture on the part of nominator, and no argument grounded in WP:R. Laziness is the exact purpose of redirects, to be perfectly honest, and the creator of a useful redirect that saves one or two characters should be commended. We don't delete redirects based merely on conjecture. Someone obviously found these useful given they were created."
  4. "One of the lowest things one can do is steal another mans tools. So you have no use for it. There is zero reason to take away something that has no higher use. Such Nominators should be required to be the one to hand edit and remove any deleted tags."
  5. "Redirects are cheap. Anyone using it is hardly likely to get it [confused]. There are lots of little abbreviated things pulled up over the years such as {{tlc}} or {{tlx}} or whatever as useful shorthand for editors."
  6. If {{Tlc}} and {{Tlx}} are acceptable names for templates, my redirects are also acceptable as they are. If not, my two redirects should be renamed. Per @Thryduulf:, "we also have the {{hat}} (not about hats), {{temp}} (not about temporary workers), {{link}} (not about chains, golf courses, an American singer, etc), {{user}} (not about drug, computer or telecommunication system users), {{admin}} (not about administrators), {{ill}} (not about illness), {{top}} (not about spinning tops or clothing), {{bottom}} (not about buttocks or the seabed), {{columns}} (not about architecture), {{reliable sources}} (not about publications, {{cleanup}} (not about cleaning), {{fiction}} (not about fiction), {{copyedit}} (not about copyediting), {{tone}} (not about literature, linguistics or music), {{neutrality}} (not about international relations), and many others".
--Jax 0677 (talk) 20:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't follow why so much of your rationale focuses on countering the claim of "confusion" when the nominative never made that claim to begin with. Sergecross73 msg me 03:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete- despite the creator's unfounded claims to "usefulness" above, the page views don't lie - no one is using this abbreviation. Sergecross73 msg me 03:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Reply - I am using the abbreviation, and there are more than one dozen uses on one of the days. The redirect is cheap and was only created recently. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, its not uncommon for a redirect to get views while its up for deletion. I probably added a few to the count too, not because I was using it as a valid redirect, but because I was researching it so I could leave a comment here. While I hadn't realized how recently you created this, I still stand by the nominator's stance - googling "TWIMEN" gave zero relevant hits for it in like the first five pages of results. This doesn't appear to be a widely used shortening of the subject's title. If no one (except you) is using it, it's not a valid redirect worth keeping. Sergecross73 msg me 16:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 17:32, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

John Hinder

Term not found in target article; no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 17:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

1985 video games

"Year video games" isn't a search format used here. Created by blocked user. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 15:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep, I don't see why it shouldn't be a search format used here. It is a way people may refer to "video games released in 1985", and that's exactly what is listed at the target. -- Tavix (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep, I could see this redirect getting used a decent amount, not to mention it is not hurting anything by being a {{R from alt name}} --Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as recently created unnecessary redirect. I'm not clear what sort of agenda this user had, but we don't have such redirect for any of the other years. Instead of fait acompli one at a time, we should gain consensus first and then add these to all years. It's not even a good alternative name as the page covers more than just games, but industry, developers, events, etc. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Shithole

I created this as a soft redirect to Wiktionary a few months ago, back before the word became infamous for other reasons. Sandstein proposed turning it into a dab page on my talk page. Due to the sensitive nature of the word, I figured it best to open it up for discussion and see if we can gain consensus on what to do with it. -- Tavix (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

  • To save clicks: I proposed creating a dab page of sorts, listing the recently much covered epithet "Shithole countries", as well as "not to be confused" links to Shitole and Sithole. Sandstein 16:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I don't think it should be a DAB unless Shithole countries is an actual article.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Hatnote the soft redirect per WP:TWODABS. I think it is entirely reasonable that someone might go looking for Trump's comments with this keyword, but the soft redir is still the "main topic." --NYKevin 01:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment the following WP:DABMENTION songs could be stuffed onto the dab page to make it look big and important. (Or not.)
    • "Shithole", a song by Les Turds on the compilation album Play at Your Own Risk, Volume 2
    • "Shit Hole", a song on the 2005 film score album Saw II
    • "The Shithole", a spoken word piece on the 2006 album Boned!
    • "Shithole", a 2016 song by Canadian band Weaves
OTOH, hatnoting a soft redirect seems worse than just making a real WP:TWODABS or whatever: readers are probably used to the formatting of a dab page, whereas a hatnote on a soft redirect looks rather odd. And unlike the case with a real redirect, a hatnote doesn't actually save any clicks when you put it above a soft redirect; you have to click either way anyway. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 17:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate given the existence of multiple WP:DABMENTION topics that could be referred to as "shithole". A disambiguation page doesn't give "undue prominence" to anything; it's just a better-formatted list of the same stuff you could find with the search engine. I don't really think that maintaining such a better-formatted list adds much value over deleting and letting the search engine do its job, but apparently no one here at all supports deletion, so list it is. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect to wiktionary per WP:DICDEF. People looking for Shithole countries can already see a link in the search box, as they type "Shitho…", so no need for dab. — JFG talk 13:40, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: JFG said: "People looking for Shithole countries can already see a link in the search box, as they type 'Shitho…', so no need for dab", but please note that the search suggest drop-down list on Wikipedia requires JavaScript, so it is not seen by people who are using a web browser without JavaScript or who have JavaScript disabled in their browser preferences or disabled via a browser extension such as NoScript; for this reason (since the search suggest drop-down list is not a universal part of the Wikipedia interface for all users), appearance in the search suggest drop-down list should never be used as the only reason why a disambiguation page is not needed (and this may also be why the search suggest drop-down list is not mentioned at WP:DAB). It is not true that all users see search suggestions as they type in the Wikipedia search box. Biogeographist (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Well, I see your point, but it's not 1998 any more. JS is pretty much required to browse the web today. I'd be curious to see stats of how many readers (except indexing bots) actually have it disabled. — JFG talk 22:15, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
JFG said: "JS is pretty much required to browse the web today." Again, not true (and not even relevant to Wikipedia, since JavaScript is not required to browse or edit Wikipedia). Design principles for "the web today" that explicitly state that JavaScript is not "required" include, e.g., Unobtrusive JavaScript and Responsive web design § Mobile first, unobtrusive JavaScript, and progressive enhancement. Even if the overall percentage of readers without JavaScript is small (say, 0.2 percent), the often large number of readers of Wikipedia guarantees that many readers will be reading without JavaScript. Biogeographist (talk) 03:00, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This seems slightly weighted toward restoring the wiktionary redirect, but the added utility of a dab re: Sanstein hasn't been refuted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 16:25, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Wiktionary (keep), exactly how it is now with no additional notation. The recent epithet is not a suitably prominent usage to be given this special treatment given that there are so many other prominent uses; doing so gives these comments undue precedence. If people want to go looking for the comments made by the Racist-In-Chief,[1] they can search for the full phrase as disambiguation, or find it linked from other articles. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:08, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Abraham, Yvonne (January 13, 2018). "President Trump, our racist-in-chief". The Boston Globe. Retrieved February 8, 2018. 
  • I'm not too sure about this one, but I think that setting up a disambiguation page is a good idea. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 22:06, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It's been a month and we're not there yet; this could use some more input. Disambiguate or wiktionary? Hopefully some more distance will be productive.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 15:34, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate add countries as PTM at the bottom for See also. The songs have been there prior to any Trump events, and none of them are primary topic. This also allows for the Wiktionary to be added. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 16:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Redirects to List of current UFC fighters

deletion - No articles have been developed or gone through any review. Editor User:Rickyc123 created the pages with only "#REDIRECT text" and "immediately" redirect to a general related page. Believe to claim authorship when the page eventually recreated. Similar is done on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 December 31#The ABC Murders (TV series) which reported by User:HornetMike. A case is file on ANI, see here Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Gaming the system - vandalism user:Rickyc123. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:17, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Strong meh Of course "[n]o articles have been developed or gone through any review" - that's the whole point of a redirect, to send readers to a more useful title when there is no article at their exact search. I suppose it might be mildly useful to go through the target page, add an {{anchor}} to each person, and then fix the redirects accordingly, but it seems like a lot of work for little benefit. These seem pretty marginal but I'd be really reluctant to call them "vandalism," assuming all of these people are actually listed at the target. --NYKevin 04:28, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep The page that I have redirected all the UFC Fighters to contain. Their Nationality, height, nickname, weightclass, Pro MMA record, Their UFC record and ranking if they are ranked. It also includes their current status e.g: If they are injurd, currently suspended by USADA, their next booked fight and the result of their most recent bout.Rickyc123 (talk) 14:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)Rickyc123
  • Delete all These are all MMA fighters who fail notability requirements set out in WP:NMMA and appear to be created on mass for reasons I can't fathom. It certainly defeats the purpose of redlinks which highlight articles which should be created. It doesnt help in the search for these targets since it would take you to the list anyway.14:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)PRehse (talk)

That is irrelevant, to the discussion of whether these redirects should stay and if you could show me where I've tried to claim credit for Dan Ige and Saparbek Safarov it would be much appreciated. Also redirects don't need reviews or be notable there are plenty of examples where things which aren't notable enough to have their own articles and are redirected to a general related page and in this case it redirects to somewhere which shows enough information about that individual which is more than sufficient of a reason to redirect there.Rickyc123 (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)Rickyc123

  • CommentIrrelevant with proven wrong and warn by admin? well, When you redirect a subject is not notbale to a general related page, once another editor (just say Alan here) create the page when the subject is notable the article creator is you but not Alan and you know that. It is easy to just look at Dan Ige and Saparbek Safarov pages who is the creator - you. That is the reason you redirect hundred of subject. You are WP:NOTHERE to contribute, you steal about 5 other editors work/content and make it your and that were all proven and reattributed to them in the ANI section. I agree content in Wiki is contributed by many and the is the core of Wiki open policy but to steal the creator initial work is not. Just take examples from academy and journalism, in academy field say a student does is master or PhD degree and work on a paper or thesis, any all content is cited with source but the paper is created by them. Just as in journalism, if the press didnt get the info themselves they have to report where they get it from (cite/reference) which means the work is not them but they create the work on the paper. What you do here is to put your name down (by redirect) and wait for other editor to do the work and your name automatically appear to be yours. This can be easily be seen at the subject history page against when your contribution page when you redirect the subject and when they subject page is created. You fool no one. If your actions was righteous, you will not be warn by admin on stealing other editors work and redirect. Question - Anderson Silva was one of the greatest fighter in the MMA history and now he is caught twice using PED, with all his wins, does he has any respect from peers or fans - none and what say about yours. When you do this you detect the actual editor which want to contribute where they initial is being stolen in a way, and they might not be contribute and leave Wikipedia. That is not the spirit of a Wikipedian and not a right way to go. You have redirect hundred of subject which are not notable not only the UFC fighter, everyone in Wikipedia could easy go to your creation log and see that, nothing is hidden in Wikipedia it is the matter if one want to investigate and link all the history together to see one's motive and behavior. How often you actually contribute vs your redirect, how many times you have stolen other editor work vs you do yourself, how many times your creations have been rejected and deleted and how many times you have been complaints in ANI. Wikipedia started with ppl want to to share knowledge to general large from those who are knowledgeable, willing to do the research to find source to cite (even they know the subject so well they still need to find source to cite as all just like in academy fields and journalism) and those who are technical in software put their time to develop application for all of us to gain the knowledge if we want to as long as we have a computer and connected to internet. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 04:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Like I said though how can I take credit for a redirect because all people have to do is look at the creation log and see that I made a redirect, they can also see who's the one who added all the info on the article so how can I steal attribution on a redirect if all somebody has to do is check the creation log. And the Redirect Vs contribution argument. Well yeah I have made loads of redirects but I don't see them as articles I have created because if you go to the creation log you can see that all I did was put in a redirect and you can see who put in all the information. Last thing is that no topic has to be notable to be redirected and I am not the first too redirect to similar pages. For example some NXT wrestlers are redirected to List of WWE personnelRickyc123 (talk) 09:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Rickyc123

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please keep comments focused on discussing the redirects
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:47, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Seems like a valid search term, proposer also seems to have a dislike of redirect creator, so taking into account the likelyness of someone watching a UFC event and searching the name of a fighter i say these are useful to the project with no valid deletion rationale. GuzzyG (talk) 07:37, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

::Comment. Please note Rickyc 123 is on the investigation on copied and pasted other editors's content from draft and create his own with evident and warn few times and now is not voting him to be banned on certain rights. see [[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Proposal - Article creation ban#User:Rickyc123 gaming the system - part 2. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 12:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Outside of Ricky and Cass, there hasn't been much participation. While the latest ANI thread may be interesting background, this discussion is not about the users. Please focus on the redirects and whether they are useful or should be deleted.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 13:11, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep all - useful search terms. I haven't reviewed the ANI or whatever but if attribution is an issue then the cut-and-pasted drafts can be historymerged into the redirects to correct that problem. It's a bit of a job, but I have tomorrow off. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

*Comment - Please note User:Rickyc123 has been banned with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Copyright violations: Persistant, willful violations of WP:CWW after multiple warnings; see ANI for evidence) - see block log here [3]. Please note I dont think historymerge could be used on a redirect page which was already create in the first place for any creation of the subject the creator name will be [[user:Rickyc123] - do correct me if my understanding is incorrect. No other list of promotions fighters that do not meet nobility (with same info, name, nick name and mma record) has redirect in such way, why single out UFC fighters? here is the list of bellator, invicta and ufc list of current fighters for view - List of current UFC fighters, List of current Invicta FC fighters and List of current Bellator fighters. Thank you. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 08:07, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Violations report

Term not found in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 11:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

This is Certified Information Systems Security Professional jargon, didn't think it needed citations as it was only a redirect Deku-shrub (talk) 13:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

OSO accolades

Doesn't seem appropriate - OSO has so many meanings apart from this one film. PamD 11:44, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Brad Knowles-Tagg

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn

TOKI (satellite)

Term not found in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 11:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Oppose Added term into article Kees08 (Talk) 19:15, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

RV32C

Term not found in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 11:14, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I would think a simple Google search for RV32C reveals the relevance: It's the standard abbreviation for the 32-bit compressed instruction set. The term may not appear literally in the article, but the linked section states that the letter "C" refers to the compression extension, and RV32C is the standard way of expressing that as part of the 32-bit ISA. --Dolda2000 (talk) 15:17, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
@Dolda2000: A Google search shouldn't be necessary to explain why a redirect goes where it does. If it's the standard abbreviation, then please add it to the article with a source to support it. Thanks. PamD 17:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Marc Europe

Term does not appear in target article; no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 11:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Zardu Hasselfrau

Term not mentioned in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 10:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

It's the character he played in Guardians of the Galaxy 2, a parody of himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 53zodiac (talkcontribs) 13:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 53zodiac (talkcontribs) 20:28, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Internet shorthand notation

Delete – The redirect arose as the outcome of a 2007 deletion discussion, the idea being that the (unsourced) content might be merged to the redirect target. However, this never happened and the target article does not reference the concept of an "Internet notation" or other shorthand notation in any way, making the redirect useless or even confusing.  --Lambiam 10:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Dontang

Delete WP:XY. Could be a typo for Dongtan or Dontan or Dongtang, but isn't the actual name of anything. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 08:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep as Dongtan is a dab page. I've added Dontan to the See also of that dab page. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 20:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 03:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep per AngusWOOF: the disambiguation page provides the reader with all the plausible intended targets, so there's no obvious risk of confusion. (Is it possible that this not a typo but rather alternative or historical transliteration, in the same way Guangdong was traditionally romanised as Kwangtung, Sichuan as Szechuan, and so on?) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

2005 film of Walt Disney pictures

Useless redirect, no need to be there 2A02:C7F:9659:4500:5801:116F:415A:850 (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

February 17

Civitas Counterpoint

Term not present in target article; no indication why this is a useful redirect. PamD 16:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment Well, back after Perseus Books Group bought Basic Books (which had a "Basic Civitas" imprint) and before they sold the Counterpoint imprint, they published a few books under a Civitas/Counterpoint joint imprint. If we had sources, Civitas Counterpoint would probably be a reasonable {{R from incorrect name}}+{{R avoided double redirect}}, given that the spaced form appears even in printed citations. But it seems to require borderline WP:OR to be able to mention anything about this situation in an article; Perseus don't discuss it on their own website, and secondary sources don't mention it either. The only verification I can find that this was even ever a thing is the books themselves that say "Civitas/Counterpoint", e.g. [4]. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Graphics.com

Term not present in target article; no indication why this is a useful redirect. PamD 16:14, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Graphics.com is a dead website with no obvious connection to article subject. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Lost Jewel of Orion

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep.

The Lost Jewel of Orion

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep.

S. Maria «Regina Pacis» in Ostia mare

Currently circularly redirect to the general article listing titular churches (to a missing anchor) – none of the other churches in the article do so. Suggest to delete until these articles are separately created. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 10:47, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Mass trucking

Not seeing term in target article, and this is the name of at least one real-world freight company, so this is not desirable or particualrly helpful. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:52, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete as WP:R#D8 unlikely synonym. I cannot find any WP:RS using the term "mass trucking" in the "mass shooting but with a truck" sense of this redirect, meaning there's no way to include any sourced content about this name at the target or elsewhere. Aside from proper nouns mentioned by the nominator, all the printed usages I can find are in the "freight transport" sense [5][6], and the search engine already does an adequate job directing readers to Wikipedia articles about those. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 05:48, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

February 16

Greek Orthodox Ochrid Archbishopric

With the exception of the foreign text at the bottom of the lead, this target article doesn't seem to have any affinity with any aspect Greek. That, and if there was any Greek affinity, most likely such a title would be in Greek itself. Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Tertiary constraint

This is a redirect to Primary constraint, but that article does not use this term (neither as a synonym nor as a related idea being discussed). Instead, the "primary" article says there are only primary and secondary, with secondary defined as anything that is not primary, therefore there is no topic-space for any other *ary. The only inbound link is a SEEALSO of Constraint (classical mechanics) as an un-annotated list list of all *ary. DMacks (talk) 17:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

  • As with quaternary constraint, it does actually discuss it. I don't know whether it makes sense to keep the redirect, though. --Trovatore (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Quaternary constraint

This is a redirect to Primary constraint, but that article does not use this term (neither as a synonym nor as a related idea being discussed). Instead, the "primary" article says there are only primary and secondary, with secondary defined as anything that is not primary, therefore there is no topic-space for any other *ary. The only inbound link is a SEEALSO of Constraint (classical mechanics) as an un-annotated list list of all *ary. DMacks (talk) 17:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

  • No, it does discuss it. Look further down. It's parenthetical and attributed to "a few authors".
    On the other hand, the first hit for "quaternary constraint" in double quotes is something from enzymatic chemistry that to my naive eyes appears unrelated (at least, the word "Lagrangian" does not seem to appear, if Ctrl+F can be trusted in a PDF file). So maybe delete per WP:XY? --Trovatore (talk) 11:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist to keep these two together
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 15:24, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

List of designers of the Final Fantasy series

The most important designers are noted in the article, but there is not a straight up list of them. Redirect implies something different than what exists. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:09, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete There's no specific list of designers that needs to be compiled. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 16:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Retarget/Keep It points to the Design section, which goes rather into depth on the process and yes, designers themselves. That section links to Category:Final Fantasy designers, which, incidentally, is where this redirect pointed before it was changed four years in (and seven years ago). As such, I'm in favor of restoring the redirect to the category, or at least keeping it as-is, which gives more prose and provides the category link (one extra click/pageload). ~ Amory (utc) 16:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 22:26, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

St. Joseph's High School, Mysore

Delete St. Joseph's High School, Mysore as implausible/impossible redirect to St Joseph's Primary School, Mysore (see [7]). I may have screwed up in trying to consolidate nearly identical school names.. Quis separabit? 22:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment The high school isn't a redirect at the moment. Can you clean up what you want to do with the two articles first? The high school one is a stub, and the primary school one is undergoing some sort of histmerge? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: The target article is an almost duplicate of http://mdes.co.in/st-josephs-primary-school-jayalakshmipuram-mysuru. I'm considering tagging it as a WP:COPYVIO, but I'm not 100% convinced since the wording is slightly different. Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
    ...I mean, considering the amount of content that is currently in that article, the similarities are quite close. The article is not nearly as long as the web page I linked, but the entirety of the article almost mirrors what is on that web site by almost half. Steel1943 (talk) 18:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • It appears there is a high school, but can't find when it was founded; you appear to have changed the high school to a primary school. Primary school would anyway be not notable and so should be redirected to Mysore. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Slash Puppet

This redirect should be deleted because there's a draft that can't be moved due to having the same name (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Slash_Puppet) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charbelfakhoury (talkcontribs) 20:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Wacky (behavior)

Recently created set of (behavior) synonym redirects that go against WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Is this really necessary? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

1) The whole purpose of having a 'wacky...' redirect was to have wacky categorized under Category:Pejorative terms for people because Wikipedia has at least one article (even if it is a disambiguation page) starting with the word wacky. If the redirect is deleted, then perhaps we should also delete the entire category. Alternatively, place this categorization elsewhere. I had originally placed it in Wacky, a disambiguation page, but that was reverted. If we keep the category, and have any page beginning with wacky, then we should populate that category methodically - or should we?. So which is more important - having a useful category (which has dictionary-like semantics), or being strict about WP:NOTDICTIONARY? Perhaps we need additional guidelines? 2) On a related note, there are many one word articles that are either disambiguation pages to articles with that word as a label, e.g., the name of a song, (rather than that word as a concept); or alternatively the most popular label of that word. Both of these cases limit effective categorization of the concept behind the word, because the concept article has not yet been written, even though the categories do exist. Its really a problem of coherence & completeness across Wikipedia articles & categories. I am a huge fan of coherence and completeness as I think these trump some guidelines (WP:Ignore all rules). I recommend keep: and/or update guidelines. Dpleibovitz (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. An encyclopedia is not a thesaurus, but either way, the two words are not closely enough related for one to redirect to the other. Steel1943 (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Repatriation Hospital in Hollywood

No mention of term in target article; no indication of usefulness of redirect. Accurate descriptive term for former name/function, but we don't include all of those as redirects. PamD 19:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Ty Roberts

No mention of term in target article including titles of its sources; no indication of usefulness of redirect. (Googling "Ty Roberts" football doesn't list him on first page) PamD 19:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - can't find any evidence this is a valid redirect. GiantSnowman 17:58, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Dorchester Atheneum

No mention of term in target article; no indication of usefulness of redirect. PamD 19:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi PamD. I made the redirect. The term "Dorchester Atheneum" is mentioned 15 times in Dorchester, Boston, including in External links (the other 14 are in refs). Disclaimer: I have never been to Dorchester. DadaNeem (talk) 19:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@DadaNeem: It's not mentioned in the text of the article, only as source of some references. For the redirect to be useful the article needs to tell us something about the Atheneum. Is it an organisation, a newspaper, a building, or what? Actually it seems to be a website, operated by one person, so may not even be a WP:RS - see here. We wouldn't usually redirect from the name of a website just because it's been cited in an article. There was apparently (same source) a library of that name briefly in the 19th century but it's not mentioned in the article. PamD 20:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Natan de Breslov

Term not present in target article; no indication of usefulness of redirect. PamD 18:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Kerala State Television Award for Best Dubbing Artist

No indication that these awards include television - either at target article or at Kerala State Film Award for Best Dubbing Artist which is linked from it and would be better target if the award was shown to include TV PamD 18:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The Television Awards articles were deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kerala State Television Awards. Not sure why the Best Actress and Best Actor ones are still around. Maybe those are notable or were created in spite of the main award being deleted? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 23:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

2018 TCR BeNeLux Touring Car Championship

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. PamD 18:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep — new TCR BeNeLux Series season will be held as part of TCR Europe. This is written in the article. Link7344 (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Investec South African Women's Open

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. If sponsor's name is significant the sponsored title should be included in the article. PamD 18:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hill People's Union

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. PamD 18:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete- per edit history, a third-party editor redirected the unnotable political party to the headquarters of the party apparently because they did not know where else to redirect it. That is not a good reason. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 18:52, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Mon Foring

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. PamD 18:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Shopno Bari

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. PamD 18:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Paramount Network Sports

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedily deleted.

Spike Sports

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. (No "Sport" section on target page) PamD 18:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Retargeted to List of programs broadcast by Spike#Sports A botched copy-paste of content from the Paramount article to a new Spike article was done here (that was a mess that didn't need to happen), so it's now in the proper place. This can be closed. Nate (chatter) 19:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Lady xorn

No mention of this term in article; no indication of usefulness of this redirect. Target Xorn article describes two male characters. PamD 18:18, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

The redirect is valid, because Lady Xorn was a female incarnation of the character. Such re-imaginings of characters is routine in comics. (In a recent storyline involving alternate timelines, to name another example, readers were treated to a black female Captain America.) Readers looking for info on her should be directed to the character's main, or parent incarnation. Nightscream (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Road FC Featherwegiht Champions

Unlikely typo - have created correctly spelled version PamD 18:04, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Best novels ever

Misleading since all novels are books (traditionally pre-digital age), but not all books are novels. Steel1943 (talk) 14:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Monster rabbit

This redirect is vague and could refer to more than just the rabbit in Donnie Darko. In fact, when I see this phrase, I think of the subject of Rabbit of Caerbannog. Steel1943 (talk) 14:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete. Even if you assume that no other monster rabbits exist, it doesn't even accurately describe the film character. —Xezbeth (talk) 20:03, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • keep The article contains "monstrous rabbit" and the redirect is useful for people wondering what movie the monster rabbit came from. Bod (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Dark Cloud 3

The sequel to Dark Cloud 2 is not mentioned in the target article or Dark Cloud 2. Fails WP:CRYSTAL. Steel1943 (talk) 14:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete as failed crystal. It's been ages, at least in video game years. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Retarget to Dark Cloud 2 and add mention in the article - Plenty of SIGCOV in reliable sources like Polygon in 2017 (Level-5 wants another Dark Cloud as much as you do), Kotaku in 2012 (https://kotaku.com/5967830/sorry-i-still-havent-made-dark-cloud-3-despite-your-requests), Kotaku in 2009 (Level 5: More People Need To Ask For A Dark Cloud Sequel), Rolling Stone magazine in 2017 (Level 5 Working on a Switch Game, Sadly Probably Not 'Dark Cloud 3') (reporting on a Japanese interview for Nikkei BP http://trendy.nikkeibp.co.jp/atcl/column/16/021400099/051000011/), PSMania magazine reported in 2006 that the game was in development (scan published here), SegmentNext in 2015 https://segmentnext.com/2015/12/04/it-looks-like-level-5s-ps4-game-is-dark-cloud-3-expected-at-psx/ (no vetted reliability). I'll make sure to throw these on the article talkpage after this RfD is done if they haven't been added to the article yet. Ben · Salvidrim!  09:52, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    @Salvidrim!: Though I'm not necessarily agreeing with your statement, given that the references you provided are essentially for speculation on a new title happening but nothing actually confirmed ... if the redirect was to refer to information you are referencing, would the preferred target then be Dark Chronicle (Dark Cloud 2), given that no series article for Dark Cloud exists? Steel1943 (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    Oops, yeah, sorry, I thought DC3 already redirected to DC2. Since there is no series page the information should be in a "Sequel" subsection of "Development" (or perhaps "Reception" is more apt here) of the latest game. Ben · Salvidrim!  22:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Stinky monkey

Unlikely misspelling and target considering that "Sticky" is not a likely misspelling of "Stinky", and "Monkey" is not short for "Monkeyflower" and could cause confusion. Steel1943 (talk) 13:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete I don't see any likelihood that somebody will leave "flower" off of "monkeyflower". Mimulus/Diplacus mephiticus has "skunky monkeyflower" and "foul odor monkeyflower" as vernacular names, and I've found one source that calls it "stinky monkeyflower". There's a tattoo shop in Massachusetts named "Stinky Monkey" and various other uses out there; but none of that seems notable. Plantdrew (talk) 20:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Unlikely search term and is not a real common name. Pagliaccious (talk) 17:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as obscure synonyms at best --Lenticel (talk) 00:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

A Monster

This redirect is vague. It could even be used to refer to Monster. However, delete as unlikely for either target per WP:NOTLYRICS for the first and the use of "A" for the other. Steel1943 (talk) 13:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 00:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep as a possible misspelling for someone who thinks the lyrics use a different article. Notice the redirect has Monster with a capital letter. Bod (talk) 04:26, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. If the name of the song is "The Monster" it really doesn't need a redirect at "A Monster." Mention of capitalisation is rather a mute point as searches do not distinquish (if it did a search for 'THE MONSTER' wouldn't have any results, would it?). If the redirect were to remain, it should point to one of the more significant uses, Monster or Monster (disambiguation). --Richhoncho (talk) 10:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Stink bug australia

Implausible search term PamD 09:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete there are many species of stink bugs in Australia. And this redirect is structured like a search query, not a common name. Plantdrew (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Kunjali Marakkar (2014 film)

Shelved film and 2014 is over. Unlikely to search for a non-existing film of 2014. --Let There Be Sunshine 08:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Monsters and imaginary beasts

Not sure it's a useful redirect, but if it is, perhaps legendary creature is a better target. This could also be an WP:XY situation. -- Tavix (talk) 04:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment Maybe this came from the Harry Potter movie "Fantastic Beasts...."? Bod (talk) 04:51, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Siedem brudne słowa

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix (talk) 03:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Waiting for Sugar Man

The redirect doesn't seem to be an alternative name or common misnomer for its target. Steel1943 (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep useful for someone who confused "Waiting for Superman" with "Searching for Sugar Man". Bod (talk) 04:34, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Butt rash

I am not finding any evidence of this being an alternative term for rashes caused by diapers that are exclusive to babies. That, and adults can have rashes on their buttocks as well, and they aren't always caused by diapers. But, then again, there is also a chance that a baby could have a rash on its buttocks not caused by a diaper as well. Steel1943 (talk) 03:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete just reading this makes me itch. Legacypac (talk) 06:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep This is the best redirect for the common term "butt rash" and it is not "infant diaper dermatitis". It even says in the article that a diaper does not have to be used. Bod (talk) 04:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    As I stared above, since the redirect is ambiguous and could refer to more than just its current target, redirecting readers to this specific article is actually unhelpful. Best to delete this redirect so that Wikipedia's search function can do its job. Steel1943 (talk) 06:10, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Toothpaste list

This redirect isn't exclusive to brands of toothpaste. It could also refer to the types of toothpaste mentioned at Toothpaste#History. Steel1943 (talk) 00:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep as most obvious redirect. Bod (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    I must disagree, given that the redirect is ambiguous. "Types" does not exclusively mean "brands" in regards to types of toothpaste. Steel1943 (talk) 06:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Redirects to Insult

These are examples of insults, but are not identified at the target. WP:NOTDIC. Steel1943 (talk) 00:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Per the PROD statement by User:PamD which I endorse "The encyclopedia doesn't need to include every insult from every culture." Legacypac (talk) 00:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure Legacypac (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete All and the insult a couple sections down too. We might want to SALT too as these would be good terms to redirect to any subject one does not like as vandalism. Legacypac (talk) 00:43, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

No money no family

WP:NOTLYRICS. Steel1943 (talk) 00:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Boiled beans

The word "boiled" in nowhere in the target article. I would have thought such a redirect could be targeted to List of legume dishes, but it's not mentioned there either. Steel1943 (talk) 00:29, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • I would have thought this could refer to baked beans, which are normally stewed rather than baked. Is there enough of a difference between stewing and boiling? – Uanfala (talk) 03:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    I wouldn't consider Baked beans synonymous with this redirect at all. Any beans can be boiled, just like one boils pasta. However, as you state, "baked beans" are different, including that they are mixed with a sauce (usually tomato based) whereas the only two ingredients required to boil beans are beans and water. Steel1943 (talk) 03:30, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Boiled beans needs some sort of redirect along the lines of "Baked beans" and until a better one is suggested, keep as is. Bod (talk) 04:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    • If there is no accurate target for that redirect, it actually doesn't need a target, nor needs to exist. In a case like this, deleting the redirect so that Wikipedia's search function can be used is preferable. Steel1943 (talk) 06:08, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Shit dick

Delete per similar consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 26#Redirects to Profanity. Steel1943 (talk) 00:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete pointless. Legacypac (talk) 01:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Enchilada sauce

Delete both per WP:REDLINK unless there is an article which actually identifies these sauces. Steel1943 (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Mexican rice

Mexican rice and Spanish rice are two different recipes for rice; Spanish rice uses a tomato base and turns out red, whereas Mexican rice doesn't use a tomato base, and its finished product turns the rice yellow. Either way, having one redirect to the other does not make sense. Steel1943 (talk) 00:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment: Mexican rice is a {{R from merge}}. Steel1943 (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete like apple pie -> pumpkin pie. Legacypac (talk) 00:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Although surprised by the redirect myself, the target article explains that the dish is unheard of in Spain and is a Mexican-style rice dish. Unless the nominators claim can be backed up by sources. The redirects need some sort of target...Bod (talk) 04:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Per WP:REDLINK, since the redirect is not synonymous with its target, it doesn't. Best to delete the redirect so that the subject can be created. In fact, the content at Spanish rice which you refer was a merge from the content that was formerly at Mexican rice. Possibly the best shirt-term solution is to restore the content at Mexican rice (while removing the related content from Spanish rice), then retargeting Mexican-style rice there. (However, I'm not even sure that he content formerly at Mexican rice is even accurate; I think as an article, it would be deleted at WP:AFD.) Steel1943 (talk) 06:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Now we're dancing on a fine line

WP:NOTLYRICS. Steel1943 (talk) 00:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm friends with the monster

WP:NOTLYRICS. Steel1943 (talk) 00:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Death fuck

Unlikely {{R from incorrect name}} per the format of its target article's title. Steel1943 (talk) 00:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Cutie Pie Snack Pies

Not mentioned at target. Steel1943 (talk) 00:09, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete looks like some independent product. [8] AngusWOOF (barksniff) 20:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Turmp

Delete as an implausible misspelling. Steel1943 (talk) 00:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete or should I say Deltee Legacypac (talk) 00:39, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as recently fashioned typo, not plausible or notable. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 00:01, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete: Non-useful typo. KGirl (Wanna chat?) 15:29, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete unlikely misspelling --Lenticel (talk) 00:47, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Turban family

I fail to see how this is either helpful or a likely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 00:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

February 15

Honey came in and she caught me red-handed

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete. This is the "clean version" of part of the song's chorus, but I cannot see this as a plausible search term. Steel1943 (talk) 23:59, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

S. C. Johnson & Scohnson

Appears to be a typo - implausible search term PamD 22:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Moral antirepresentationalism

No decision Closed discussion, see full discussion.

Djamâa Lihoud

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment Looks like a transcription of the Algerian Arabic pronunciation of جامع اليهود, "the great mosque of the Jews", which seems like more of a nickname than a proper name. OTOH it is used in reliable sources, e.g. Rahmani, Farida; Bouchenaki, Mounir (2003). La Casbah d'Alger: un art de vivre des Algériennes. Paris-Méditerranée. ISBN 9782842721749. En face du marché Djamâa-Lihoud, s'élève l'ancienne synagogue, aujourd'hui Djamâa Fares [In front of the Djamâa-Lihoud market rises the former synagogue, today the Djamâa Fares] . 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Villa de Nuestra Señora del Refugio de los Esteros

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

AMPED Distribution

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

You make a woman go mad

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak delete. This is part of the song's chorus. However, I could see this being an appropriate {{R from incorrect name}}, but also not really. Steel1943 (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

UD Melilla 1943

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:06, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - redirect should be kept, this looks to be used by the club (eg see their Twitter) as an alternative name, likely to honour the club's original founding in 1943. GiantSnowman 11:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Dunkin do

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Rabble rabble bitch bitch

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Watch Dogs 3

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Spending all your money on me

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Honey came in and she caught me butt naked

Term is not mentioned in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The wise elders

Not in target article: no indication why this is an appropriate redirect. PamD 22:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Stumblebum

Redirect inappropriate given that it is based on just one quote describing him as "Mandarin pretending to be a Stumblebum". Link to Wiktionary would be more appropriate. PamD 22:12, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Game Boy Camera & Printer

WP:XY. This redirect could refer to Game Boy Camera or Game Boy Printer. Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Move to Game Boy Camera and Printer without leaving a redirect In my opinion the two articles should be merged into that one. When you get rid of all the unreferenced cruft, the articles are not very large - and the two peripherals were designed to be used together.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Game_Boy_accessories#Game_Boy_camera_and_printer. The section discusses both and has links to the individual articles. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 21:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Nintendo controller

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Base Delta Zero

Not mentioned in article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:35, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Not mentioned in article, but is mentioned in Star Wars, apparently. As the term is not even mentioned in Space warfare in fiction, it seems completely irrelevant for it to remain here. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC).

Wii 3

This Nintendo Switch is clearly distinct from the Wii console line. That, and if this redirect exists, I think we should probably also create Nintendo Entertainment System 7, which doesn't exist and shouldn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 18:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Switch is not a sequel to the Wii, it's a whole new console.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

GameCube Linux

It's unclear what these redirects refer to. The word "Linux" is not present in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Not mentioned.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. I just discovered Nintendo GameCube Linux, which was previously an article. At the present time, I'm not sure if it should be restored and the nominated redirects retargeted there (then the article probably should be sent to WP:AFD), or this nomination should stand as is. Either way, since Nintendo GameCube Linux has substantial edit history, I don't believe that it should be grouped with this nomination. (Pinging Czar since they redirected Nintendo GameCube Linux - diff.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • My stance stands unless GameCube Linux is proven notable, which I doubt.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • GameCube Linux is not independently notable, based on the sourcing. Their first release had some coverage[9][10] but at best I would just include that as a sentence in the main GameCube article. This topic should really be covered along GameCube homebrew, which together might only warrant a single combined sentence in the main article. That said, this is a topic for which readers are likely to search and one that we can cover, even if only if brief, within the main article. Retain redirects. czar 10:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Video game console redirects that begin with "The"

Various redirects which start with "The" and the rest of the title is the name of the console (or codename for the console) which it redirects. I can't see these as likely as they are not names for the consoles themselves. Steel1943 (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak keep But why delete? Redirects are cheap and this is definitely the correct target. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 17:43, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete all I see no reason why these are necessary, we don't have to append "the" to literally every possible article title.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Kind of my thoughts here. That, and if these are kept, we might as well allow redirects that start with the word "The" to be created for any unique subject on Wikipedia with a proper name. Steel1943 (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
      • I find redirects very helpful and we already have plenty of "The" redirects: [11] [12] [13] [14] I could argue that the iPhone and the NES have had comparable amounts of influence. Wqwt (talk) 02:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I added The ps3 and The PS3 to this discussion after the above comments. (Sending courtesy pings to Koavf and Zxcvbnm to ensure their stance applies to the newly nominated redirects as well.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Thank you. This wouldn't change my !vote but it is considerate. ―Justin (koavf)TCM 18:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Dreamcast 2

Doesn't seem like any information for this nonexistent Sega console exists in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:37, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Comparison of Final Fantasy Titles

Not sure where the "comparison" is here. Implausible redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:08, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete - Using the word "comparison" makes this seem inappropriate to me, particularly given how vague and open-ended comparing one video game to another can be. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:06, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete no such table and implies comparison of features as WP:NOTCATALOG AngusWOOF (barksniff) 16:54, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not 100% behind this, but could a retarget to Recurring elements in the Final Fantasy series work? It's not a strict comparison page (that'd likely be overly fancrufty anyway), but it does discuss and compare multiple games, covering both similarities and differences. Might make some use of this redirect, as it seems like a reasonable search term and this page could be helpful. ~ Amory (utc) 02:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:11, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nothing in edit history worth keeping. Nothing that I imagine was merged, so no attribution history to preserve. Not a reasonable search term unless series pages can somehow be considered comparisons (they're not). czar 10:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

List of towns and locations in Xenogears

Delete per WP:GAMECRUFT. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

List of factions in Xenogears

Delete per WP:GAMECRUFT. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Yggdrasil (sand submarine)

Disambiguation is too WP:INUNIVERSE and is therefore misleading. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:16, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Gears and vehicles in Xenogears

Delete per WP:GAMECRUFT. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete No one in their right mind is going to use these search patterns. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:36, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • All of these lists were redirected 12-13 years ago during the early transwiki projects. The edit histories are no longer of any use, and wikilinks to these lists have long-since been fixed. Honestly, all of them probably qualify for WP:A5 at this point, as long as the content has actually been shifted to the Xenogears/Xenosaga Wikia. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 10:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Russia and brexit

Duplicate of Brexit and RussiaJFG talk 00:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep as a helpful rearranging of the words. Steel1943 (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't Russia and Brexit be more appropriate? ~ Amory (utc) 13:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Sure; if the redirect is kept, we should fix the capitalization. — JFG talk 14:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Autrefois

While the word autrefois probably appears more in the context of double jeopardy than it does anywhere else in English, it's still very strange to have a somewhat common word from a major world language redirecting to a legal concept with no real relation to the word's meaning. If it were a more common word, I'd say softly redirect to Wiktionary, but it isn't, and there doesn't seem to be any logical target here on Wikipedia, so I propose we delete.  — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Note: Page's target from '07 to '11 was peremptory plea, a related topic. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:RFOREIGNJFG talk 00:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep or retarget to peremptory plea. There's quite a bit of this usage in the legal context, even on this very encylopedia. The Law French page just points autrefois convict and autrefois acquit to peremptory plea (which they already redirect to) so this would presumably be useful. I recognize that WP:RFOREIGN exists, but this is a case where the foreign word isn't commonly used in English for its French meaning via direct translation, but rather as a specific use — one could even argue that legalese qualifies as "some form of English." There could be an argument for dabification — with links to the two legal terms, Autrefois, Maison Privée, Hang On Little Tomato, Giuseppe Silvestri, La damnation de Faust, and List of compositions by Jules Massenet — but honestly most of those are fairly tenuous and are all meant in the context of the French meaning. ~ Amory (utc) 17:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
    • @Amorymeltzer: I agree that RFOREIGN does not apply to the redirects for autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, since Law French is self-evidently relevant to the topic of law. However, as far as I know autrefois is not a freestanding term in Law French. Rather, it appears only in those compounds, in the related term autrefois attaint, and maybe in a few other compounds of which I'm unaware; but never on its own. The fundamental problem here isn't so much one of RFOREIGN, as it is that we're redirecting a foreign word to a topic with which it has only an indirect connection (and this is true in the case of either of the two targets). If the common name here were in English—formerly acquitted, let's say—would it make sense for formerly to redirect to either of these articles? — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
      • I think your analogy isn't quite right. The proper analogy would be if formerly acquitted was used in the French legal system, and the only place the word "formerly" showed up in the French language was in that context. That doesn't seem too crazy to me, but then again I expect to be in the minority here. ~ Amory (utc) 13:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Based on this context, I believe the redirect of just "autrefois" is misleading. Legal expressions do not use this word on its own, and they are already appropriately redirected. A reader searching for "autrefois" will see the autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, they should not see a plain "autrefois". — JFG talk 15:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak keep roughly per Amorymeltzer. Loanwords often end up with absurdly narrowed meanings compared to their original language (c.f. guanxi vs "relationship", apparatchik vs "operator"); this just seems like another example of that. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 18:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

February 14

List of destinations served by ferries fron the port of Piraeus

Just a redirect because of a minor typo in the original word "from" in the title. Pointless to retain. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Seems pointless and egregiously unlikely. Joefromrandb (talk) 01:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete was a result of the page move and should have been cleaned from there. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • Missed opportunity, perhaps, but five months is not recent enough for WP:CSD#R3. ~ Amory (utc) 23:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

PlayStation(R)4

Should be deleted per MOS:TMRULES. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:05, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 21:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Gabriel (footballer)

I suggest redirecting this to the Disambiguation page for Gabriel as there are currently many Gabriel's that play football. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Note for closer: I'm hoping that the closer here will also close the move request at Talk:Gabriel Vasconcelos Ferreira#Requested move 30 January 2018 so that we don't have any dispute over which process supersedes the other. (In the absence of this discussion, I would already have moved that page and this would no longer be a redirect to be discussed.) Dekimasuよ! 04:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Machine gun nest

Neither the phrase nor the word "nest" appears anywhere in the target article, so a reader looking for a definition of the phrase is left none the wiser. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:44, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep This seems like an example of WP:SOFIXIT given that the term is incredibly common in literature about war. A search of Google shows many, many books that use this term to describe defensive fortifications with a machine gun.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:42, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Studium provinciale

Deletion. The redirect identifies a studium provinciale and a studium generale; this claim is not substantiated SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll restore the RfD template at the Redirect to continue the discussion. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 13:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Gerald Yao

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Hook Ya Crook (film)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted per WP:G8. The redirect technically depends on the article Hook Ya Crook, which was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hook Ya Crook. If it wasn't for a bizarre redirect-fixer bot move during the AfD, it would have been deleted then. -- Tavix (talk) 20:59, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Hoolahoop

Non-notable spelling of the name. It reads like someone's attempt to brand the product, but even then there are no news or general articles for this. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:00, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Pageviews since its creation suggest it's not a common typo.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:14, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. This strikes me as a plausible phonetic spelling with, as far as I know, no risk of causing confusion or sending the reader to an unexpected target. Notability is a test we use to decide whether a topic warrants an article; it has nothing to do with redirects. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:49, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
That assumes the audio searches will favor hoola over hula, and there's no evidence this is common enough to warrant this. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I wasn't thinking of anything as high-tech as that – I was just imagining a reader who is unsure of how the term is spelled and so spells it in a way that seems to make sense. Obviously what is and isn't plausible in that regard is a subjective matter and reasonable opinions might differ quite a lot. The key point though is that there's no obvious harm done by having this – no risk of creating confusion or misinforming the reader – so no obvious reason to delete it. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:13, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Entirely plausible spelling. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:37, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep. Plausible phonetic misspelling. Steel1943 (talk) 12:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Transit (Christian Petzold (director))

overspecified with the extra parentheses for director AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Wing Commander: Privateer redirects

WP:GAMECRUFT details not described in the video game article. Items, locations, weapons, and races. These were all created by a single editor. This is WP:NOTWIKIA, should not house every object or term from the game. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete all As pure gamecruft.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • IMHO keep Are you sure WP:GAMECRUFT applies also to redirects? Locations are not mentioned in the policy and redirects are not articles. We are not talking about a pointless description of these locations. Citing the names of the major star systems could be interesting and meaningful considering it is a game focused mainly on exploration. Moreover these redirects are harmless WP:Paper, useful as placemark for future disambiguations and... well if a reader, even one time per year, digits "New Constantinople" then I believe he should be kindly redirected to that page. I could add a star system list in the article to give more context to these redirects. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 13:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, gamecruft applies to redirects. They would have to be strongly notable to warrant a R without mention tag. And please don't add lists of star systems or gameplay items. That would definitely conflict with WP:GAMECRUFT #7 (lists of levels, list of weapons, list of items). If any of those terms are critical to the understanding of the game, please work that into the plot and gameplay sections. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:36, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete all per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 13:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Warren Graham

Not a key character in the video game as he is not even mentioned. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Ronaldo's

Redirects not needed for possessives for names if they are not a notable business. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 01:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Friedrich Knollenberg

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: procedural close

Joap

Not mentioned at target, not clear what the connection is. Plantdrew (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Move to JOAP without redirect, retarget to Oil analysis which discusses the acronym for Joint Oil Analysis Programme. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Per AngusWOOF. --Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose moving the redirect. It's fine if you want to create JOAPOil analysis, but that should not be tied with the fate of this redirect. I'd lean more towards deletion anyway. Joint Oil Analysis Program is a redlink there, so someone thinks its notable. -- Tavix (talk) 19:03, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
That's the only thing that's relating Joap to condensation topics. But redlink is fine too. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:41, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

February 13

African lions and big cats by country

Term not found in target article: nothing to indicate that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:56, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

@Leo1pard: Adding "External links" is not the way to go about this. If you believe that these alternative names are valid and useful, please add them to the text of the article, using your sources as references. Thanks. PamD 22:28, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
I turned links into references to add them and information in them to the texts of Barbary lion, East African lion and Southern African lion. Leo1pard (talk) 07:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Papuan flycatcher

Term not found in target article: nothing to indicate that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Papuan flycatcher is another common name for this species (which I've just added to the article), currently used by the eBird/Clements checklist of birds of the world, one of several widely-used global bird checklists; Wikipedia uses the IOC checklist as its main source for bird taxonomy, but eBird/Clements is also popular (especially in the Americas), so it's not a bad idea for differing common names to have redirects. Spizaetus (talk) 00:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, redirects from all common names are important - but they should all be listed in the article too, not least to show the reader why they've landed on the page. Thanks. PamD 00:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
I disagree that every common name should be listed, especially those that are archaic, or used locally. Seldom used common names or historic names are more useful to aid in web searches than in linking between current Wikipedia articles, and principles of good writing may preclude exhaustive listtings of colloquial names. --Animalparty! (talk) 01:48, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
If they're really obscure or archaic, shove 'em in a footnote to avoid WP:UNDUE problems, but they should be verified somewhere at the target with sources. With redirects, there's no way of separating out the two functions "aid in websearches" and "linking between current Wikipedia articles" anyway. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Peter tomarken

Implausible search term PamD 21:43, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

George Branković, Prince of Serbia

Term not found in target article: nothing to indicate that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • This should help: Google Books Search: George Branković, Prince of Serbia - hundreds of hits are pointing precisely to Đurađ Branković (1427-1456). Sorabino (talk) 21:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Please add that name to the article, using one of the hundreds of sources you've found. Thanks. PamD 00:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
OK, I added this: Andrić, Stanko (2016). "Saint John Capistran and Despot George Branković: An Impossible Compromise". Byzantinoslavica. 74 (1-2): 202–227.  Sorabino (talk) 16:24, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Territorial acknowledgement

Term not found in target article: nothing to indicate that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • This is intended as a more general term to describe the practice outside of Australia. The title is long, highly specific, and unlikely to be thought by people only familiar with the general concept of acknowledging the indigenous inhabitants of a territory, making a redirect a useful addition. --Varavour (talk) 22:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
So could you please incorporate the term into the article, with an explanation of what it means (sourced)? Thanks. PamD 22:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    • I will do that.--Varavour (talk) 18:55, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Leornard Fournette

Implausible misspelling PamD 21:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete as implausible typo. Can't spell Leonard but spells Fournette properly? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:08, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Purpose of killing

Term not found in target article: nothing to indicate that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:31, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete vague term, not clear if there is a terminology for such a phrase. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:48, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Turpid

Redirect from adjective to specific concept seems unhelpful. PamD 21:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Winter of 1978–79 in the United Kingdom

Implausible search term for this topic. PamD 21:18, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Keep. Why do you say implausible? It's the definition, a near exact synonym, often following or preceding the metaphorical allusion, and could plausibly be used in a source without the Shakespearean epithet. See [15], [16], [17], [18]. I don't think it's likely to be confused with an article on weather, e.g. Winter of 1981–82 in the United Kingdom. --Animalparty! (talk) 02:11, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

British winter of 1978–1979

Implausible search term for this topic. PamD 21:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

1979 British winter

Implausible search term for this topic. PamD 21:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog 5

Sonic the Hedgehog 5 doesn't exist and Sonic Mania is not ever called Sonic the Hedgehog 5 by reliable sources. The1337gamer (talk) 19:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete Created by a slow burn vandalism only account, no reliable sourcing to back it, and scant unreliable sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 23:53, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per Ferret's findings --Lenticel (talk) 00:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

🙏🏼

Delete. Redirecting this emoji to Emoji is unhelpful: it is like redirecting a specific letter to Letter (alphabet). See also WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 9#🙏. Gorobay (talk) 16:54, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete, no reason to think that emoji would be linking to Emoji, no obviously better target available. See previous discussion as well. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Retarget to List of gestures. The emoji is ambiguous because it can represent a few different gestures, but the gestures it can represent are listed there. -- Tavix (talk) 17:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    • The problem with that target is that it also lists many gestures that this emoji does not represent, with no indication of which those are. Gorobay (talk) 19:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
      • I don't see that as a problem. I believe a searcher would have at least a little bit of competence to figure out which gestures involve folded hands. It's certainly better than giving them nothing. -- Tavix (talk) 19:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep, although I'm not averse to retargeting. We routinely redirect symbols of all sorts to articles on the general class; see or , both of which are letters of the Lao alphabet and redirects to that article, or and , both of which are box-drawing characters and redirects to that article. Redlinking such a thing, except to encourage the creation of an article (which I suppose to be highly unlikely for your average emoji), is unhelpful: for the many users whose computers cannot display the emoji, the link helps them determine what the little box is. Nyttend (talk) 23:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
    • The difference is that your examples’ targets explain what those characters are. Emoji doesn’t explain what ⟨🙏🏼⟩ is, because it doesn’t, and shouldn’t, list all emoji. Gorobay (talk) 19:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as with the previous RFD. Should not be retained unless it has a detailed unicode box like what happened with Japanese postal mark AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:46, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
    • I don’t think an article needs to have a detailed Unicode box to be a valid target: it just needs to give information about the character. The target doesn’t even need to use the character in question; many emoji redirect targets don’t. Gorobay (talk) 19:38, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 2#Emoticon or Emoji? for a related discussion. Though I started that discussion, I honestly have no opinion on this one since I feel like this redirect should be WP:G4'ed, but it obviously doesn't qualify, so in this case, I have no opinion about what happens to this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 03:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

February 12

Krazy Kids

There are many things and places termed Krazy kids and this redirect pushes the target right to the top of google search results, unfairly in my view. There is also The Crazy Kids of the War amd Wild & Crazy Kids Legacypac (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Then it will become a disambiguation page? Bod (talk) 05:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Krazy Kids Disambiguations are not for partial title matches. It's a plausible typo for Crazy Kids. Delete Krazy kid too many typos to be plausible.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:29, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete the K version of the phrase has only been used for non-notable businesses. Crazy Kids song is not primary topic. It'd be different if Krazy Kids was the song title and Crazy Kids redirected to it. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 21:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Benis (song)

No mention at target page. PamD 22:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete - As far as I can tell, nobody has recorded a song about the various nonsense slang words for male genitalia. Certainly not this group. 06:27, 13 February 2018 (UTC)CoffeeWithMarkets (talk)
  • Delete as per nom Chetsford (talk) 22:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

List of Final Fantasy XI locations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19#List of Final Fantasy XI locations

Adventure Log

There exists a card game called One Piece: Adventure Log and the term is also used in such games as BOTW. It's an overly generic term that should probably be deleted as it has no clear target. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 21:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Moocher

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Jewish life in Mexico

  • Delete. It is not clear why the redirect was created in the first place, as there's no need for it at all: No article or redirect named "Jewish life in" another country exists, no article links to the page, and it has zero daily views. Yambaram (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete. As per above, article adds no value to Wikipedia. Rangasyd (talk) 15:14, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 01:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete' per nom so as not to set off a "(religious) life in (country)" precedent. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Grenz, Egon

Procedural nomination of a closed AfD. Rationale was "Grenz, Egon redirects to Egon Krenz. But Grenz is not a frequent misspelling of his name." power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:18, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete. Redirect has existed for nearly 14 years so it's obviously not harmful, but if you look at the history it was clearly created in error. Misspellings are viable redirects but I don't think that should extend to sort names. —Xezbeth (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak rename to Egon Grenz. The way it is phrased, it seems more like a location like Grenz is a village in Egon. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:04, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Comparison shopping

This nomination also includes Price comparison, another redirect to the same target, and my reasoning is the same.

Delete. Comparison shopping is a much broader topic than merely something related to a kind of website; this is vaguely like redirecting Travel agency (if we didn't have an article on the topic) to Online travel agency, because in both situations we have or would have a broad topic being pointed specifically to an online variant thereof. See WP:RFD#DELETE point #2; this redirect might make confuse you by making you think that comparison shopping is just an online thing, for example. Since we don't have an article on the general concept of comparison shopping, we ought not pretend that this article covers the concepts of comparison shopping or price comparisons; it ought to be red unless there's an article that I've not found that really does cover the concept, rather than websites that perform such a service. Nyttend backup (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Weak target to Shopping#Pricing_and_negotiation There isn't really a section that discusses particular methods of comparison shopping, but this would at least give the user a starting point and the ideas of bartering and negotiation as well as going to price comparison websites. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 00:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Retarget - Price comparison seems like it should go to either 'Pricing' itself or some specific section within in it. I guess I'm neutral as far as the other one goes. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 22:17, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm fine with retargeting to a reasonable location. Nyttend backup (talk) 22:15, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Sky Does Minecraft

WP:R#DELETE 10. The redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject. Zoom (talk page) 17:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Comment I don't see it on the list? Did it get bumped off? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 22:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment When I created the redirect, the channel was indeed listed in the target article, but was removed after leaving the top fifty. At this point, I wouldn't be opposed to its deletion. LifeofTau 06:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • delete for now due to no longer discussed in the article --Lenticel (talk) 01:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

GFW Global Championship (current)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Complex Media

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Terrible terrible damage

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Shahram Dabiri

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

World Of Warcraft:- Rogue

The very strange punctuation here makes it implausible as a redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete as attempt to WP:WIKIA the World of Warcraft articles by expanding to multiple types of character classes. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Livres (political party)

Livres is a social liberal movement (not a political party) and Social Liberal Party is social conservative party. It makes sense, doesn't it?

179.99.159.161 (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Red link Livres was originally created as a wing of the Social Liberal Party, but the entire organization quit the party when they chose Jair Bolsonaro as their presidential candidate, and the organization is now totally separate.[1] However, Livres is likely a worthy topic for an article, so I recommend deleting these redirects to encourage article creation. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://theconversation.com/brazils-institutions-are-working-but-its-political-party-system-is-a-disaster-90889

Head rhyme

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Hang Tuah State

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19#Hang Tuah State

List of weapons in the Armored Core series

I think it is obvious why this isn't a plausible redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Black panther the album music from and inspiered by

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

February 11

User talk:Batreeqah

One other user talk page, User talk:LewisH1993, also redirects to the Main Page, but this is because of a note on the page that makes it intentional. The "Batreeqah" redirect to the same page, however, may not be intentional because it is the previous username for a renamed user. Should it therefore be retargeted to User talk:Batreeq or converted to a soft redirect? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Retarget to User talk:Batreeq. It's harmful for a user talk page to redirect to the Main Page (or anywhere else besides a user talk page) because automated messages follow redirects and there is potential for a message to be posted on the Main Page. -- Tavix (talk) 19:17, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per below. If Batreeq does not want them retargeted to their current account, then they should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Only delete if the move log itself can be deleted. Thanks. – Batreeq (Talk) (Contribs) 23:04, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
  • No. The main page is protected and you can clearly observe that it's the main page. I see no harm in the redirect, but do not redirect to my current pages please. I had my account renamed for a reason. – Batreeq (Talk) (Contribs) 05:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Batreeq If others here are opposed to redirecting to the main page, would blanking the page be acceptable instead? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 06:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

User:Batreeqah

There are other user pages, such as User:Aimsplode, that redirect to the Main Page. But this one happens to be the previous username for a renamed user. Should it be retargeted to User:Batreeq or converted to a soft redirect? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 16:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Retarget to User:Batreeq so it's easier for people to follow that Batreeqah is a renamed account now named Batreeq. -- Tavix (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per the below. If Batreeq does not want them retargeted to their current account, then they should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 16:04, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Same reasoning for the matching User_talk page. Please read my response for that. – Batreeq (Talk) (Contribs) 05:41, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Stranger (Chris Brown song)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Tom Chilton (game developer)

Not mentioned in target article. Should also be deleted per WP:REDLINK. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Delete per nom.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  06:34, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep Tom Chilton (game developer), Delete the others for weird syntax and non-notable nicknames. His article was converted to a redirect in 2016 and he is not independently notable from World of Warcraft developer. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
    • If he is not notable, why redirect to an article where he isn't mentioned?ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:29, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
He's listed in the infobox. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:28, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 14:02, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Pinging @Czar: as the user who turned the article into a redirect. ~ Amory (utc) 14:03, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Restore the first one: As per Tavix. Retarget the others to the restored article. 200.171.226.100 (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Retain the first redirect, delete the others. Per my edit summary in 2016, Chilton isn't covered in reliable, secondary sources separate from the topic of World of Warcraft development. If someone has sources to prove his independent notability, feel free to show them, but it makes no sense to restore an article that only has interviews and primary/affiliated sources from the developer if the point of the biography is that he worked on World of Warcraft. If his role in that development is important, cover it in the game's development section summary style. In the meantime, the name is mentioned in the infobox, making the target plausible. czar 15:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Livres (political party)

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: procedural keep

Evocare

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Mounts (World of Warcraft)

Delete per WP:GAMEGUIDE. Barely mentioned within the article itself. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:19, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Note: World of warcraft mounts was retargeted to Races and factions of Warcraft ~ Amory (utc) 14:05, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
    • I'll change my rationale to... because there are hundreds of MMO's with mounts and this is the only one disambiguated in this way. Unless we are going to make a "Mounts (Elder Scrolls Online)" or something for every game, we are agreeing that this is unnecessary.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:20, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Bill Spaulding (sportscaster)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Various Falcon 9 upper stages

Redundant with Falcon 9 flight 6, Falcon 9 flight 7, Falcon 9 flight 8, Falcon 9 flight 11 and Falcon 9 flight 12. Upper stages of rockets are not notable by themselves, and the simple "flight n" redirects are enough for search purposes. Some of these redirects were apparently created to populate a dubious category Category:Former derelict satellites that orbited Earth. I have nominated the category for deletion as well. — JFG talk 10:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Upper stages aren't really derelict satellites. flight 6 already redirects there, and flight 6 article has only one line about the upper stage being left. Hardly anything to WP:COATRACK AngusWOOF (barksniff) 22:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Do not delete ALL; rather, individually delete as appropriate -- it would seem to me that any artificial satellite orbiting Earth—often but not always called a "payload"—is worthy of a Wikipedia redirect. If the second stage deorbits in the first day or two after launch (a common design approach), then it need not ever have a redirect. But if a second stage remains in orbit for months or years, as a large number of rockets launched by government militaries and other gvmt agencies have, especially in the decades of the 1970s-1990s, then it is perfectly appropriate to have the redirect. These second stages, launched by a private company, IF left in orbit long-term, ARE notable precisely because they are space debris, and a long-term negative externality not addressed by the company that launched the debris up to space.
If the second stage eventually falls out of orbit and renters Earth's atmosphere, then it is arguable whether the redirect ought to stay, but that should be handled on a case by case basis; not as a group deletion of redirects. N2e (talk) 07:57, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
@N2e: I understand the point you're making, from an astronautics enthusiast's point of view (as we both are), but I do not see any WP:RS asserting individual notability of any of these objects. — JFG talk 00:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
If there is sourced information about a long-term derelict object in space, as there was in the case of each of these redirects at the time the redirect was created, and if that information exists and is sourced in prose in an article, then it is okay that a redirect to that information exist. An entire new article on any of these would require comportment with WP:GNG. A simple WP:REDIRECT to the paragraph or section where it is discussed, does not need a notability guideline examination. If we are to be the encyclopedia of human knowledge, than a redirect that helps readers see which boosters have been left derelict in orbit by their launch-humans is perfectly appropriate.
I continue to think that, at best, the individual redirects might be reconsidered, if say, an object has deorbited. I don't believe nixing the entire category is good for our readers. N2e (talk) 02:46, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Category is already gone… — JFG talk 03:28, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

TWIMEN

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 18#TWIMEN

War of worldcraft

Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Jace Connors

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Zetsubou

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Take‑Two Interactive Software

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Doom game details

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Fall of Mars

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

List of enemies in Doom

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

John Lynch (footbal player)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 10

Overton's 400

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: resolved

Ashley Ketchum

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ash ketchup

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Redirects to List of current UFC fighters

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 18#Redirects to List of current UFC fighters

Super Luigi

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Hyrule Castle Town

Not mentioned at target. Either delete or weak retarget to Universe of The Legend of Zelda#Hyrule. (I say "weak" on the latter since the target section is about Hyrule the kingdom, not Hyrule the city/town.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete People would just search for "Hyrule", or even "Hyrule Castle" if they wanted to know about it, so this is an implausible redirect.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 21:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Attention Admins: This is now being discussed elsewhere on a list of similar Redirects related to the very same video game. Please close this separate nomination as "Discussion moved," "Discussion merged," or whatever the term for this change of venue would be. This may be very bold of me, but I can see plain as day that it was the right thing to do. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:51, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
    • This bold merge has been undone. I purposely nominated this separately to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Steel1943 (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
      • On what grounds would Hyrule Castle Town, and only Hyrule Castle Town, lead to a WP:Trainwreck? Separating the original list into dungeon and non-dungeon locations might be helpful, but as it stands, the Haunted Wasteland (for example) isn't a dungeon either, and yet it is on the original list. This doesn't help anyone, in terms of assessing location Redirects based on their significance within the game. Now as for mentions of locations in reviews or commentaries of the game, I highly doubt that Hyrule Castle Town is mentioned more frequently than the actual dungeons are. Highly doubt that. In short, you need to demonstrate why Hyrule Castle Town is slightly more notable than the locations on the original list, instead of just reverting me and essentially saying "Because I said so." The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
        • See nomination statement. The "weak retarget" option could be seen as plausible to someone. Steel1943 (talk) 16:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:25, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Location/level/stage redirects to The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

These redirects are all locations/stages of the target article's subject not mentioned in the target article or Universe of The Legend of Zelda. Steel1943 (talk) 23:22, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete as overly vague or gamecruft.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:56, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:Cheap. Otherwise, at least be consistent. Forest Temple, Water Temple, and Shadow Temple are not nominated at present. (Fire Temple, oddly, is an actual Article and not a Redirect.) Anyway, since Redirects are cheap, we should usually err on the side of keeping them. There are plenty of bad Articles, that are Articles and not Redirects, to be deleted here on Wikipedia! Exceptions would be, well, things that pose serious problems for syntax or are too long to expect anyone to type it in the Search Bar. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
    • WP:CHEAP is not a valid argument, otherwise I could cite WP:COSTLY right back. Many of these are confusingly vague, such as "Ice Cavern", which features in hundreds of video games. The ones that remain imply a level of crufty detail that the article doesn't have.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
    • (edit conflict) Referencing WP:CHEAP as a reason to keep a redirect really only applies when the redirect is essentially the same subject as its target. All of these subjects are minor subjects within the target article's subject, and these subjects are neither mentioned nor identified in the target subject. Leaving these redirects in place sets a false expectation that a reader looking up these redirects will find either an article or section regarding the subject of the redirect. Over the years, such subjects have either been wholly deleted and/or moved over or created on their respective Wikia-type site. Leaving such redirects on place on Wikipedia is problematic since readers end up finding no information about the subject which they just searched. Steel1943 (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
      • Argument accepted for Ice Cavern and Haunted Wasteland, but not for the Temples (IE major dungeons). The Temples are far more significant, both within the game and in reviews and commentaries of the game. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: The nomination for Hyrule Castle Town should be part of this same discussion, and not a separate nomination. I have copied its information accordingly. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 06:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
    • (edit conflict)...And I have undid this. I nominated that redirect separately since I expected a potentially different result for that redirect, and was attempting to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Steel1943 (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
      • Not with any justification, other than that nonsense about conflating Hyrule Castle Town with all of Hyrule. That is conflating a country (albeit a fictional one) with its capital city. In short, you have offered no justification as to why you expect a "potentially different result" on that from anything else on this list. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 01:50, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
        • Since I explained the alternative option in that redirect's discussion, I am unclear what "justification" I need to provide. Steel1943 (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Nominator comment: It turns out that Spirit Temple is actually mentioned at the target (not sure why I failed to find it), but I still believe that it should be deleted as unhelpful due to lack of an explanation of the subject in-game, lack of notability as a standalone subject, its vague title, and unnecessary WP:GAMECRUFT. Steel1943 (talk) 15:24, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
    • Reply comment: I still think that you are applying Article standards to Redirects, and you should re-read WP:Cheap. Redirects aren't subject to the same standards, or rather the same level or extent of said standards, as Articles proper. A Redirect by definition isn't being treated as a "standalone subject," but rather, the Target Article is the main subject. That is why a Redirect needn't have the same level or amount of notability as its Target, or any Article for that matter. I hope that explanation makes sense. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
      • I'm making a claim that there is either no or insufficient information at the target to explain to the reader what the subject of the redirect is, which is enough to delete a redirect. In regards to actually adding the information to the target articles, yes, I do believe that adding enough information to identify the subjects of these redirects does fail Wikipedia's article standards to a point where they should not even be identified in dedicated sections of other articles. Also, I understand WP:CHEAP and do not believe that it is a reason to keep these redirects for the reasons which I have already stated. Steel1943 (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Ice Cavern is overly generic for this target, so it should be retargeted to Ice cave. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 19:51, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Just here to comment that were I to close this, I think I'd be inclined to relist. With that in mind, I'll note for the future closing sysop that I don't think WP:WPVG was notified for any of these proposals. While not strictly necessary, if a closing admin were to relist any of these, I think those folks might appreciate a heads-up given the bulk nature of this. Likewise for the Mario noms onthe 24th. ~ Amory (utc) 22:28, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete all And anyone is welcome to re-create more of these to a more suitable target. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:10, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete all - All real things, but unlikely search terms for Wikipedia. (In-universe game locations rarely have their own article.) Sergecross73 msg me 04:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Sonny Hedgehog

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Skateboard Park Tycoon World Tour of 2003

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Chaos Blast

Not mentioned in the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete Seems to be a powerful attack in-universe. Obscure referene and might violate WP:GAMEGUIDE --Lenticel (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Refine/fix redirect to Sonic_the_Hedgehog#Chaos_Emeralds. This appears related to those items, and would at least be useful. The target broke the section header. ~ Amory (utc) 15:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Chaos Energy (Sonic the Hedgehog)

"Chaos Energy" is not mentioned in the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Refine/fix redirect to Sonic_the_Hedgehog#Chaos_Emeralds. This appears related to those items, and would at least be useful. ~ Amory (utc) 15:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

United States Colonial Marine Corps ()version 2)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

James Earl Carer Junior

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Hypersonic hegdehog

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sonic the Hedgehog (Sonic Underground charachter)

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ziaul Faruk Apurbo

Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: resolved.

Sonic (2018 film)

Movie apparently premiers in 2019, making this misleading as a redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:46, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Leaning keep on this one. Not everyone may know of the delay. They may search for it, or it's conceivable not all piped links are updated right away either. Sergecross73 msg me 04:10, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete - If the supposed movie is WP:TOOSOON, I feel the redirect for it should be as well. It could be reinstated when the movie is ready for an article. Red Phoenix talk 03:09, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Sonails

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Super form

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of items in Sonic games

Delete as fancruft, and as there is no list in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete - no such list exists, or ever should, per WP:GAMECRUFT. Sergecross73 msg me 04:11, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 04:59, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. WP:GAMECRUFT is a good application here. Such a list is really only a fit for Wikia, and wouldn't be in a main article either. Red Phoenix talk 22:33, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep and refine to Sonic the Hedgehog#Common features. Okay it's not a list per se, but the original goal content of that redirect is covered in the target, fairly in-depth. May not be a pure list, but it's close enough to be useful. ~ Amory (utc) 02:02, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Refine per Amory. -- Tavix (talk) 20:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep and refine per amory Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Sonic apocalyptic monster

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 9

.esd

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Armoured personal unit

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Major Patten

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Hlavní strana

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Nooo

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mid Laner

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Metwo

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Pokemon/Charmander

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19#Pokemon/Charmander

Pokémon directory

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Pokemn Green

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Pokémon Red and Blue guide

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Pokemon/Pikachu

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19#Pokemon/Pikachu

Bicac

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Inkajoo

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Zafari

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19#Zafari

Fatma Şahin Memik

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Male wire frame

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete.

Dontang

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 18#Dontang

Rocketbarrel Barrage

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Platform fighter

Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Home-Run Bat

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

大乱闘スマッシュブラザーズ,

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of F-Zero AX pilots and circuits

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Panther in the Dollhouse

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

.DBC

.DBC is the name of several file formats, not mentioned at current target, couldn't find any appropriate target. Paradoctor (talk) 00:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete A Google search yields sources revealing that .DBC is a file extension associated with Blizzard Entertainment, as is .MPQ. That explains the rationale behind this redirect's creation even if it doesn't justify its target or its continuing existence. If the MPQ article doesn't explain .DBC files, and no one is about to come up with text to cover it there, then the redirect is of no use, especially if .DBC has other referents, in which case MPQ and Blizzard Entertainment may both not be primary topics for ".DBC". Largoplazo (talk) 03:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: DBC is listed at List_of_filename_extensions_(A–E)#D. There's a link to Visual FoxPro, where it is not mentioned. ~ Amory (utc) 22:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion&oldid=826598596"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA