Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 3

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 3, 2025.

T:WPBIO

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. charlotte 👸♥ 00:57, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

This redirect's existence is very confusing without context, with a target only familiar to one (1) user who used this redirect regularly back in 2009, in order to have a quick way of navigating to the work groups section of the WikiProject Biography template's documentation. But not much since.

To my understanding of the creator's own words from the previous RfD, OlEnglish does not feel strongly about the need for the shortcut to remain in the (highly controversial) "T:" space. The primary concern in 2009 was to have SOME shortcut to this list, which did not necessarily have to be a T: one, but T: was emblematic of its era. In the previous RfD, OlEnglish said that "WP:TPBIO works" to navigate here moving forward.

And to that end, there are plenty of navigation options now. There is WP:TBIO, WP:TPBIO, and WP:TWPBIO, which all target the template itself. But it should be noted that T:WPBIO targets a section of the documentation. That is where this redirect's target becomes a problem, because the reason for pointing inward is not at all obvious and confusing for not just any reader who made the mistake of typing in "T:W" and clicking the first result, but ANY user perusing the backrooms and shortcuts. To that end, it was fundamentally necessary to indicate where the shortcuts were going to go in some way.

This is easily done with three more shortcuts, for WP:TBIOWG, WP:TPBIOWG, and Template:WPBIOWG. Long? Maybe. Unwieldly? Not much more than WPBIO already is, just with a "WG" for work groups after. But targeting "WPBIO" to the work-groups section is a non-starter without any indication at either page (from my POV), when targeting WPBIO to Template:WPBIO is a lot more expectable. Typing in T:WPBIO to be sent somewhere other than Template:WPBIO is nothing short of shocking.

And, all of this is before we consider the [[TM:]] acronym alias. (TM:WPBIOWG). It has never been easier to get to template space than it is now, as "TM" works for all templates on the site with 100% accuracy and reliability, and has the benefit of being super short, and not interfering with highly-likely mainspace search terms. So imo there's really no need for this PNR now. T: is reserved for only the most essential titles and has very low support, even lower with the solution of [[TM:]] being recently created. Out of the 10+ ways of navigating to this singular list of work groups, new solutions exist in 2025, and this does not seem (to me) to be worth maintaining with a mainspace title. No incoming links. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete. I have no qualms. TM:WPBIOWG is fine. -- œ™ 14:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The Pregnant Man

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Pregnant man as unopposed. charlotte 👸♥ 20:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 23 § Pregnant man ended in a consensus to disambiguate at Pregnant man. There are two entries on that page that sometimes take a definite article: Thomas Beatie, a/k/a The Pregnant Man; and the current target. Between the two, I think Beatie is the primary topic, but Google Scholar also shows a lot of usage to mean the generic pregnant man (in any of the senses described on the DAB), so I think retarget to DAB, second choice retarget to Beatie with hatnote to the book. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 20:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

T:Partner

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. charlotte 👸♥ 20:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

New T: space redirects. Really not necessary. Pseudo-namespace redirects are generally unideal as they occupy mainspace with the rest of our encyclopedic titles, and such titles should be kept to a minimum. T: space does not enjoy broad support. It is one singular character, and interferes with searches for actual articles such as T:kort and T:DS (an article who's title is fully encompassed by the PNR of T:DSA).

In this case, there's no indication why not one, but two separate titles need to be made for such a template. This was created after the implementation of the [[TM:]] prefix, which makes searching for ALL templates a breeze. TM:Partner works. No need to occupy mainspace when it can be entirely avoided with the presence of an "m" to navigate to this page. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Agreed! Sounds like a reasonable change! And it would seem to be in line with appropriate use of redirects mainspace redirects. Pedantical (talk) 20:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Tiger Bech

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Jack Bech#Personal life. charlotte 👸♥ 20:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target. C F A 18:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Jack Bech as a {{R from relative}}. -- Tavix (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete, no longer mentioned at above suggested target. Even if it still were, I'd still say delete, as there was no substantive content there anyway. Either this person is notable, in which case WP:REDYES, or not, in which case, let the search function do its job. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:22, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Speedy Delete this is awkward. I draftified this page for not meeting the notability requirements but I thought it would be odd not having a redirect entirely, so I redirected it to the page. This can go under G7 or R2. -1ctinus📝🗨 23:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Retarget to Jack Bech#Personal life, per R from relative as Tavix stated. Plectiscus (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Delete, no longer mentioned on 2025 New Orleans truck attack or Jack Bech. ★ The Green Star Collector ★ (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
There is now a mention again. Ca talk to me! 02:30, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
Retarget to Jack Bech#Personal life. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 19:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Moumita Debnath

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Moumita Debnath

Wikipedia:ACCR

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Wikipedia:Account creator. Hog Farm Talk 17:10, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I assume this is supposed to stand for "Arbitration Committee case requests", but it took me a good while to figure that out. This shortcut is only used on two pages, and in both instances, it was an attempt to link to Wikipedia:Account creator. I propose retargeting it there. JJPMaster (she/they) 16:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget, seems reasonable. and the current target already has WP:ARC, which is much clearer. Tessaract2Hi! 16:54, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Account creator per nom. A good example of when retargeting shortcuts makes sense. J947 ‡ edits 22:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:17, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Russian immigrants israel

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hog Farm Talk 19:45, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not google. This redirect is formatted as a list of keywords. Cremastra (u — c) 16:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Jay 💬 18:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Pakistani kalashnikov

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Pakistani kalashnikov

Surf shop

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Surf shop

Retiring to florida

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hog Farm Talk 16:51, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Lots of people retire to Florida. I don't see why this state trust fund is the primary topic for the term. Cremastra (u — c) 16:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

God's waiting room

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hog Farm Talk 17:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Apparently this refers to a one-off joke made by the governor of Florida , but there's a 2022 film of this exact name that is surely the WP:PTOPIC here. Cremastra (u — c) 16:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Slavic jewish immigration united states

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Hog Farm Talk 17:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Firstly, slavic jewish immigration isn't discussed at the target, and secondly, this is made an unlikely search term because of the lack of "in the". Cremastra (u — c) 16:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

United State Police

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Hog Farm Talk 19:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I find this a strange search term: surely a more likely target Law enforcement in the United States, and the searcher merely omitted the 'S' in 'States'? Cremastra (u — c) 15:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Either delete or retarget to Law enforcement in the United States. Current target is clearly not suitable, as it suggests "United States Police" (i.e. some kind of nationwide police force) and I've never heard state police specifically described as "united". 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete being in title case implies this is the proper name of something (or a typo of the proper name of something), but there's in fact nothing by that name. United States Police is red, as it should be (in contrast to United States policeUnited States police). 59.149.117.119 (talk) 08:08, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above, and we have the proper United States police redirect. Jay 💬 18:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Hitachi LXG-1

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

No mention of "LXG-1" at the target article, nor "LXG". Appears to be a small cabin biplane which is wholly undiscussed at the target article. "Hitachi LXG-1" is not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia for that matter. A variant of Hitachi "LXG" is listed on List of Japanese aircraft in use during the Second Sino-Japanese War but the link in question is not the same. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:59, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

XLG-1 was the IJN designation for the Tokyo Gasu Denki KR-2 (aka Gasuden KR-2). The KR-2 was a development of the Gasuden KR-1 with a new wing, which was itself a modified/developed de Havilland Fox Moth fitted with a radial engine, so it should redirect there instead, at least for now. I redirected it to Hitachi based on the information I had at the time as no page yet existed, and I didn't have sufficient references on it to do the page justice. Looking at it now, the supposedly reliable published sources I had, and which are widely quoted, may be incorrect, which isn't unusual with minor Japanese aircraft companies like this one. The Putnam book on Japanese aircraft 1910 to 1941 claims Gasuden merged into Hitachi in 1939. Hitachi never built any though, as production had ended by then, but the name/designation may have originated with a mistake by the Japanese Navy.
I fixed the page above, but not the Hitachi redirect. - NiD.29 (talk) 07:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. And thanks to NiD.29 for removing mention from the list. Jay 💬 18:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Stephen P. Hills

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Hog Farm Talk 16:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Neither "Stephen" nor "Hills" are mentioned at the target. A 2005 stub which was redirected to WaPo in 2010. Not useful as a redirect which gives zero information about the manager to the newspaper whom may have been with for a bit. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete for now. A History of The Washington Post would certainly be a viable split, and Hills would probably merit a mention there; or he might even merit a mention in a more detailed history section in the current article. In either eventuality, a redirect would be appropriate. Till then, though, this shouldn't exist. The 2008 article would be immediately BLPPROD-eligible if restored, so I don't see it as worth restoring. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 21:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Glacier remnant

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Glacier remnant

Christopher Raia

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Hog Farm Talk 16:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Seems to be an FBI official . Not mentioned at target or anywhere else on Wikipedia. Cremastra (u — c) 15:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

High-Def Digest

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Hog Farm Talk 16:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

No mention of "High", "Def", or "Digest" anywhere at the target article. Appears as a blu-ray review platform occasionally in some citations. Nevertheless, without content at the target, this is not helpful as a redirect at this time. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Hehe boi

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. Hog Farm Talk 16:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned meme redirect. Was once discussed in the page, but is discussed no longer. Without such a dedicated section, nothing substantiates this redirect and it can lead to confusion and WP:SURPRISE upon use. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Hard red winter wheat

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. charlotte 👸♥ 20:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

"Red" is not mentioned at the target. Hard red winter wheat and soft red winter wheat are classifications of wheat defined by the US Department of Agriculture and discussed at Wheat production in the United States. Perhaps used beyond this too. But people looking for information on this class of red winter wheat would not be able to find it at the target article, presumably. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep; I've added a sourced mention at the current target; I'm also seeing some evidence that this terminology is used in Canada as well. Hog Farm Talk 16:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per the added mention. Jay 💬 18:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Amorrhitis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Amorrhitis

Israeli bombing of lebanon

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Israeli bombing of lebanon

West Virginia Tech Mountaineers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

This redirect confuses two teams:

Bkag Fishing (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete, incorrect and ambiguous. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. J947 ‡ edits 22:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Aseem Sharma

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Page-move vandalism, no relation between them. GrabUp - Talk 13:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

SummarizeDiscussion

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the redirect's undeletion. charlotte 👸♥ 20:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

A cross-namespace redirect of limited utility that should probably be deleted now. The page was originally moved by cut and paste in June 2002 (back when that was the only viable option) to Wikipedia:Summarize discussionWikipedia:Summarize discussion, which was itself made in to a redirect in May 2003, hence the current situation. I history-merged the early edits, moved the page to Wikipedia:Historical archive/Abandoned help pages from 2001/Summarize discussion (also see its parent page), and unredirected it. There's no relevant history at the "SummarizedDiscussion" page after my history merge, the historical archive is a surprising place to be thrust into from the main namespace, the "Talk page" redirect is less than helpful, and we don't even summarise discussions anymore ... we archive them. As for the links to the SummarizeDiscussion redirect, they're maintenance reports and it's completely harmless for all of them to contain red links. Graham87 (talk) 13:28, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

MOS:WINGSUIT

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#MOS:WINGSUIT

OK gesture (film)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to OK gesture#As a film title. charlotte 👸♥ 20:32, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

While the film was known by a symbol similar to the OK gesture, it has never been called "OK gesture" in any source I'm aware of. JJPMaster (she/they) 05:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment The film does not have a title as such and is simply known by the OK gesture a la 👌, Super is merely a fan title that has stuck (as noted here OK gesture#As a film title). While the symbol is best read as OK, since 👌 already redirected to OK gesture which contained info about the film, I decided to rd this reading as well. Gotitbro (talk) 06:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The two "Big N" redirects

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was disambiguate. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 17:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

For some reason, these two are targeting completely different targets (Big N -> Neister's, The Big N -> Nintendo), despite the fact that the only difference between the two is the word "The".
If one target has to have bigger priority, surely it would be Nintendo? User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Weak delete Neither of the two mentioned targets came up on a Google search for "big n" or "the big n". What I did see was a rock band called BIG'N, and DJ Big N which could be a retarget for the non-the redirect. Tessaract2Hi! 17:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate Big N between DJ Big N, Nagasaki Baseball Stadium, and Neisner's (where Big N is mentioned), with see also links to Big N' Tasty and maybe Nintendo, and retarget The Big NThe Big N to there. A German gaming magazine by the name of The Big N is mentioned severally across the site, but without content describing it. J947 ‡ edits 22:23, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate per J947. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Eddy Martínez

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at the target in any capacity, making it a misleading redirect. Was weirdly undeleted at one point with an accusation of abuse towards another admin, but I guess technically irrelevant to the redirect itself. Hey man im josh (talk) 03:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Re-delete, obviously. Nyttend hounding my CSD logs to undelete a misleading redirect after it had been G8'd, and letting it continue misleading readers for 3 months unattended is obviously not ideal. The page it was dependent** on, Eddy Julio Martínez, was G7'd years ago. Thanks to a bot fixing a double-redirect at some point, the titles diverged, but naturally if all the page information of "Eddy Julio Martinez" has long since disappeared, there is no reason to keep "Eddy Martínez" either.
 
**: Regarding undeletion and the definition of "dependent" in the context of G8, the text of "WP:G8" is a criteria for "pages dependent on a deleted page". Even if the two titles diverted in targets because of a stray bot edit, leading to the creation of an obvious targeting error (i.e. the titles should have been identical for the same individual), the "dependence" between the two was still present. Per wikt:depend, if something is dependent on something, its existence is contigent or conditioned on that thing. The existence rationale of a redirect for a name in this context, is contigent on the existence of the full name - if one goes, its automatically natural for the other to go, especially so as the creator's original intention was to depend the two as a redirect pointing towards the other. No other definition of dependency is defined in the text of G8. Thryduulf has an unlisted definition of "dependent" addressed here that: (paraphrased) "the only way a redirect can be dependent is for the redirect to target a blue link". But this being the only definition of "dependence" regarding redirects is not shared, or written directly in WP:CSD. In absence of such, the text reads as if G8 is not a strict CSD; in fact, according to the text, "Examples include...": [the following possibilities] "...but are not limited to": [even more unlisted possibilities, which may or may not be for/include redirects, who can know, they're all unlisted]". At the moment, I view the illusion of infinite examples to be vague, which is okay, unless it's not intended to be vague for redirects, then it's not. If there is only one profile of redirect that can be deleted via G8, (blue links pointing at red links) let's just say directly that it's the only type for redirects! I'm happy to accept that as the case moving forward. I think it would be beneficial to add a parentheses bit where we say in the text for G8: Redirects to target pages that never existed or were deleted. (This is the only reason to delete a redirect using this criteria) / (The only way for a redirect to be deleted via the G8 speedy criteria is if the current redirect target is a red-link at the time of deletion), or something like that. But in the absence of such a hard-written clarification on what it means for something to be dependent, and/or that the only type of redirect which can be deleted is blue->red and that no other alternate examples apply to redirects (if consensus indicates that is truly the case), the conceptual existence of Eddy Martinez is very much contigent on the conceptual existence of Eddy Julio Martinez. Conceptually dependent, if you will. But spirit of the law over the letter; should've stayed deleted after CSD imo as the deletion of this page is an improvement to the encyclopedia. Not having my CSD log be hounded back to 2019 to make preposterously bad undeletions of 5-year-since deleted revisions (referring to the Green Cargo Mb revision undeletion here). Utopes (talk / cont) 02:12, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Guaifenesin/codeine/pseudoephedrine

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Guaifenesin/codeine/pseudoephedrine

Serbian State

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Serbia. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Mismatch with Serbian state which redirects to Serbia. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

(full stop).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Seems to be an extremely unnatural and odd redirect title. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete This was created as a redlink here in 2008, and made into a redirect 15 minutes later. Not useful as a redirect, and seems to be a product of ancient Wikipedians testing out the site's functions. 1857a (talk) 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • This might have been created partly because its for some reason not possible to create [[.]] unlike , and ? etc but its probably not needed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

History influencer

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#History influencer

List of news companies in St Vincent and the Grenadines

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

List no longer exists in article. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete, the current target doesn't have a list of news companies (and as far as I know, there's no other suitable target). 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:43, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

St Vincent & the Grendadines

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

somewhat unlikely misspelled w/ an awkward and sign makes this redirect double unlikely. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete, too much variation from the original title for the misspelling to be plausible. mwwv converse∫edits 12:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. Contrary to the above, there's only one misplaced character (a spurious "d") - the ampersand is perfectly legitimate. I would consider this to be a plausible typo. Tevildo (talk) 22:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete, implausible to hit both of these rarities at the same time per nom. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Implausible misspelling of Grenadines. CycloneYoris talk! 08:12, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Adamantium (band)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 10#Adamantium (band)

I-10 exit list and etc.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was convert to lists of lists. charlotte 👸♥ 20:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

The target pages do not contain exit lists. These redirects are currently unhelpful in their pure formats, i.e. of lists pointing at a general interstate articles. There are occasionally some "exit lists" that exist across Wikipedia, but none that would be cross-country-encompassing as the name of this implies. In the meantime, the current existence of these redirects to the general interstates is misleading. It has been suggested once before in 2023 to possibly structure lists of lists for these, but the discussion closed as no consensus. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguate all per Presidentman. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Chlaenius finitimus and etc.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned species redirect to genus, not helpful as a standalone redirect as a red link indicates lack of individualized content for these beetles. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I'll note that, without checking all of them, that these once existed as substubs and were redirected by User:Stemonitis. I don't think the substubs were really worth having, and I'm not interested in putting in effort to restorethe redirects as articles and expanding them to a useful state. The point of having List of Chlaenius species is to keep the Chlaenius article from being overwhelmed by a list of 1000+ species. But that means none of the species are mentioned in the Chlaenius article, where there is at least some useful context about the genus that is applicable to the species, and the only place the species are mentioned is in the list article, which lacks any useful context. This also plays out on with some other lists where Stemonitis turned substubs into redirects, e.g. List of whitefly species and Whitefly and List of Carex species and Carex. Plantdrew (talk) 22:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
@Plantdrew: This specific set of titles were pre-tagged as "Redirects to articles without mention", and no other Chlaenius species were, so I started with this (not aware of the massive scope of untagged titles). There are definitely more redirects to this location, but the larger the bundle, the harder it can be to parse the entries. Going through the list of nearly 800 species redirects as you say would be a monumental task. Now that this has been an identified issue (to be resolved when possible), my current focus is to continue investigating redirects with the CAT:RAW tag to find some other unidentified issues. Hopefully this (albeit smaller) nomination can get the ball rolling with a larger one if anyone is up for going through the entire massive set of beetle species redirects to a page that gives context to no specific ones. I'm sure it'd be fairly uncontroversial given the nature of the previous RfD, but still a tall order to capture the entire set in one location. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Forza Kosova Party and etc.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget European Party of Kosovo to Coalition Party (Kosovo), delete the rest. ✗plicit 14:38, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Bundle of currently unmentioned Kosovo political parties. None of these pages have histories. At some point in time, they may have had dedicated sections, but this article has been substantially shrunken and all of these titles are currently without associated content, nor any sources. Communist Party (Kosovo) was among this group and was nominated in October with Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 11#Communist Party (Kosovo), but frankly I think WP:TNT may be a valid remedy, as this list article has give or take 160+ incoming redirects and over half of which are titles such as these nominated here, i.e. sourceless and contentless. Select titles can always be created and reinstated on a case-by-case basis for Parties with coverage on WP. Mass retargeting can also be discussed. There may be suitable titles that exist on Wikipedia, perhaps with multiple options, maybe. I'm not sure which will always be the best options, but the status quo of "Parties targeting a list where they aren't mentioned" doesn't seem feasible; I trust in any suggested remedies. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks