Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 22
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
October 22
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 22, 2025.
Mimi Lieber
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 2#Mimi Lieber
Labiodental trill
- 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 International Phonetic Alphabet#Consonants 2. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 06:21, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- Labiodental trill → Trill consonant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Seems to be unattested. BodhiHarp 18:00, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:24, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to International Phonetic Alphabet#Consonants 2, the only mention (it's quite plausible the reader is looking for the symbol [ʙ̪]), otherwise restore and send to AfD – it appears plausibly notable. J947 ‡ edits 20:18, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget. Agreed, [ʙ̪] is the probable target. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 21:27, 23 October 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).
Ʃcip
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was Speedy Delete (G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (91838jeu72737) in violation of ban or block). Deletion itself performed by Sohom Datta. (non-admin closure) Casablanca 🪨(T) 13:12, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
A weird mix of the Greek letter Ʃ with the Latin characters cip. Listed as being in Albanian but they don't use Greek letters and the proper Albanian word is just shqip. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:18, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, G5...all the others by this user can be similarly tagged. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:MIXEDSCRIPT Duckmather (talk) 00:55, 23 October 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).
Cpncku
- 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 speedily deleted by G5. No consensus in this discussion, so no prejudice against recreation with a strong feeling about its validity. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 20:21, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Implausible typo of a "romanization" of Српски because the backwards n has been replaced with a u. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:14, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- ⟨и⟩ looks like ⟨u⟩ in handwriting and in some typefaces. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 22:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Its use on the Internet is rather widespread. Not so much a typo as a false-encoding solution. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 16:13, 23 October 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).
Noshk
- 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 speedily deleted via G5 by Justlettersandnumbers. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 20:23, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Implausible typo due to two different errors. This is listed as a typo of Norsk but the s is one character earlier and the r has been replaced with an h. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. BD2412 T 03:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Comment: rather than a typo, this is a sort of phonetic spelling. "rs" in "norsk" makes the "sh" sound in Eastern Norwegian dialects. I don't see much usefulness to it, though. Geschichte (talk) 12:24, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and others. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 15:21, 23 October 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).
Ka3akcmah
- 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 speedily deleted via G5 by Justlettersandnumbers. No prejudice against recreation. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 20:24, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Implausible typo of a "romanization" of Қазақстан. The t is replaced with an m which is far away on the keyboard. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:09, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Comment. The Cyrillic letter te can look like an m. - BᴏᴅʜıHᴀᴙᴩ (talk, contributions) 01:27, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Weak keep per Bodhiharp, Cyrillic "т", when written in italic scripts, is rendered indistinguishable from an "m" and thus could been confused as such. It's overall a marginal case but such a search could happen. Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 08:03, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 16:11, 23 October 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).
Pukovnija
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 30#Pukovnija
Gedeminne' hat
- 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.
These are all errors, with a possessive apostrophe but missing the final "s". The correct versions exist. (Note Gediminas' Cap has been moved to Gediminas's Cap per MOS:POSSESS). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 00:10, 24 October 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).
Fancruft
- 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:Fancruft. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 19:48, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- FancruftFancruft → wiktionary:Special:Search/fancruft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
weak nom, if this needs clarifying. also, my suggestion isn't to delete. feel i should get this out of the way early so it's not misconstrued (again)
the use in the context of wikipedia seems to be the primary topic by a pretty wide margin. for example, a search for "fancruft" net me 4630 results, while "fancruft -wikipedia" got 571, and those were pretty much all in the context of pages in other wikis using the term in the context of wikipedia (or shamelessly taken from it), but that happened to not mention it (hell, one was from wikt-pt). thus, retarget to wp:fancruft? consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 19:42, 22 October 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).
Edit filter
- 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.
- Edit filterEdit filter → Wikipedia:Edit filter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cross-namespace redirect, redirect could plausibly be expanded or otherwise used in mainspace. Perfect4th (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. This is neither a desirable nor necessary WP:CNR. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:50, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete apart from the target there doesn't appear to be any other Wikipedia or other wiki results. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:21, 24 October 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).
Er Kanada
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29#Er Kanada
Sir Carter
- 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.
Jay-Z's son, not mentioned in the target presumably for WP:BLPNAME reasons. We shouldn't have a redirect as long as he isn't mentioned in the article, and additionally there is no reason to prefer Jay-Z's article to Beyonce, his mother's, if we did. Rusalkii (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete agree with nom on both points. Zzz plant (talk) 14:57, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 15:22, 23 October 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).
Crapola
- 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 redirect to Wikt:crapola. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:32, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
This probably shouldn't exist. While crapola is generally synonymous with crap in terms of something being junk, none of the disambiguated terms for crap really match up with what crapola means. I don't think there's a great target for this, so it's likely best deleted. Casablanca 🪨(T) 18:00, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete or soft redirect to wikt:crapola. I am bad at usernames (talk | contribs) 18:48, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:crapola. There is a never-ending interest in obscenities and related word forms. Many prominent examples are described on en-wiki, possibly increasing the likelihood that this one will be searched for. I agree that the brief definition at Crap fails to capture the meaning of crapola. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 21:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Comment If there is any potential for lack of unanimity while closing, I am perfectly okay with soft redirect if consensus continues to head that way. Casablanca 🪨(T) 01:06, 23 October 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).
Alexandru Chiţu
- 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.
No explanation at the target as to why does this redirect exist. It's a name redirecting to someone with a different given name but the same surname. Super Ψ Dro 17:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. This does appear to be someone else. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:52, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:RDELETE #2. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 15:24, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete – unjustified redirect. Svartner (talk) 18:34, 23 October 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).
Mr. Democracy
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 30#Mr. Democracy
1988 California State Assembly election
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 30#1988 California State Assembly election
Short penis
- 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 Human penis size. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 16:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Short penisShort penis → Micropenis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 28 § Short penis – no consensus
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Small dick – retarget
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Small cock – delete
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Nanopenis – delete
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Tiny cock – delete
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Small dick syndrome – retarget
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Longn – delete
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 10 § Tiny penis – retarget
Retarget to Human penis size. This aligns with the behavior of numerous other redirects like small penis, tiny penis, and so many others. I would have just changed this an obvious case but there was a 2020 'no consensus' RfD so I'm listing it here. There were a bunch of penis size RfD's at this time and they all ended up targeting either Human penis size or Small penis or being deleted; this one is an outlier. Small penis size was a dab page at the time; it is now also a redirect to Human penis size. "Micropenis" is far too specific. Also, while the human organ is obviously not the primary topic for Penis, readers searching for penis size are most likely interested in humans. The hatnote at Human penis size points to Micropenis (and other pages) and micropenis is discussed in the article. This change will bring wp:CONSISTENCY with other penis size redirects. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 15:58, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget as per nom; extremely good arguments presented. If the reader did really want to go to micropenis, the hatnote will take them there. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:21, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget, People are probably not looking for something of this specificity. -Samoht27 (talk) 20:58, 23 October 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).
NASCAR O'Reilly Auto Parts Series at Atlanta
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 15:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- NASCAR O'Reilly Auto Parts Series at AtlantaNASCAR O'Reilly Auto Parts Series at Atlanta → NASCAR Xfinity Series at Atlanta (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I propose a deletion as it's a bit too soon, plus it's blocking a future move to this article name. MysticCipher87(alt-account) (talk) 13:46, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep It is not blocking a move (or at least was not) per WP:MOR, which allows moving over a redirect if the redirect only has one history entry and is targeting the page being moved to it. The next race at Atlanta for the series as well is going to be under the O'Reilly Auto Parts moniker, so I don't think it's too premature either as ticket listings for next year are listing it as the O'Reilly Auto Parts series (c.f. Fr8 208 and Bennett 250). Casablanca 🪨(T) 14:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep The 2026 race is still called O'Reilly. LDW5432 (talk) 17:54, 22 October 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).
Ayodhya massacre
- 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.
- Ayodhya massacre → Ayodhya firing incident (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The redirect title is not used in a single neutral and reliable source which I could find online, including both news sources as well as scholarly one. None of them have characterised this as a massacre. Worst of all, over the span of more than a decade, the redirect has barely gotten above a thousand views and it is clear it is seldom used. It should be deleted. — EarthDude (wanna talk?) 18:24, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. I see no evidence of substantive used of this term to refer to the events at the target. I do not see that it meets the criteria at WP:RNEUTRAL. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
Keep (edit conflict) Redirects need not be neutral, per WP:RNEUTRAL, they just need to be verifiable. I can verified usage for this as well, so I support keep.[1][2][3] Casablanca 🪨(T) 18:40, 14 October 2025 (UTC)- That's strong evidence for deletion, or at the very least for converting to a disambiguation page, though I wouldn't support such. The second source refers to the redirect target; the third source refers to the aftermath of the Demolition of the Babri Masjid, two years later; the first source does not specify, but is clearly not referring to the redirect target. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Vanamonde93 I completely missed that the years don't line up. That's entirely my bad. I'm striking my vote and comment, but leaving the articles because they do support your point. Casablanca 🪨(T) 18:51, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete - There is no evidence that it was a massacre, calling it massacre is both inaccurate and inappropriate. Zalaraz (talk) 13:57, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
References
- "Uproar over India mosque report". Al Jazeera. News Agencies. 24 November 2009. Retrieved 14 October 2025.
- Srivastava, Samarth (4 November 2021). "Those who ordered Ayodhya massacre will soon queue up for kar seva: UP CM Yogi Adityanath". India Today. Retrieved 14 October 2025.
- Khan, Arshad Afzaal (6 December 2017). "In 25 Years Since the Ayodhya Massacre, No FIR Lodged, No Cases Registered". The Wire. Retrieved 14 October 2025.
- 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).
Sotong
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 2#Sotong
Template:Use Birtish English
- 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.
- Template:Use Birtish English → Template:Use British English (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not improve encyclopedia. from Piperium (chit-chat, i did that) at 06:30, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep It is a reasonably common typo, is not new and is harmless. How might deleting it improve the encyclopaedia? How does nominating it improve the encyclopaedia? It doesn't: It wastes the time of several people which could be spent on constructive work. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:26, 22 October 2025 (UTC).
from Piperium (chit-chat, i did that) at 09:51, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- ow my formatting consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 12:41, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- ow my formatting consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 12:41, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. If this typo was so common, the redirect Birtish would have existed sometime during the almost 25+ years of Wikipedia's existence, but it never has. Steel1943 (talk) 14:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as a random typo. It's one thing to have useful shortcuts and synonyms for templates, but it's quite another to have obscure typos. Why this and not every other letter transposition for every template in existence (including redirects thereto)? Not existing would be better, as the mistake is immediately obvious, and doesn't obscure template usage for those looking for it. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:17, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per 35.139.154.158. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:23, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Regardless of whether this is a reasonably common typo or not, no reason why we should use this typo in the template namespace which is internal for editors to use and maintain wikipedia. Jay 💬 17:04, 29 October 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).
Peter Ward (construction)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29#Peter Ward (construction)
Doychland
- 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 speedily deleted via G5 by Justlettersandnumbers. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 20:53, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Implausible misspelling of the German word Deutschland. Does not appear to be any alternative language. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 20:06, 23 October 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).
Palatal ejective fricative and affricate
- 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 Ejective consonant#Fricatives. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Palatal ejective fricativePalatal ejective fricative → Ejective consonant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Palatal ejective affricatePalatal ejective affricate → Ejective consonant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Seems to be unattested. BodhiHarp 20:35, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of these two?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep (and refine to #fricatives). This sound, in case anyone is wondering. It is referenced in the article, and has been hypothesised for several languages. I am altering the redirect target to the relevant section. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 16:17, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Иованъ as a heads-up, you don't actually want to retarget a redirect mid-rfd. on top of generally disrupting the process, closures can also target it elsewhere anyway. here, it effectively means that your vote is actually to refine to #fricatives consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 17:28, 23 October 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).
Foederal Republic of Germany
- 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. The consensus here is that the use of this spelling is implausible enough that it's a highly unlikely use and not needed. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 13:38, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Foederal Republic of Germany → Germany (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This spelling of federal is implausible. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:26, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. This is apparently an archaic spelling of "federal" (sometimes with the œ digraph), one which died out well before the modern state that this refers to came into being, so there's no particular reason that this should exist. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:20, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep in case someone uses the archaic spelling. There's no particular reason that this shouldn't exist. -- Tavix (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- The reason it shouldn't exist is that it's useless. No one is plausibly going to use the archaic spelling (do you even know what archaic means?), and if they do, they should have no expectation that it would work. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- archaic: No longer in ordinary use, though still used occasionally to give a sense of antiquity and are still likely to be understood by well-educated speakers and are found in historical texts. I don't buy the argument that it's useless, but useless redirects should be left alone. Only harmful redirects should be deleted. The effort to delete them is much more resource-intensive than it would be to keep it in place. -- Tavix (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
"I don't buy the argument that it's useless"
Facepalm , really? really? You're going to sit here with a straight face and suggest someone might actually type this in? Really? Really? Come on, even in 1791, the latest quote given in the Wiktionary entry, Google ngram viewer shows a 250:1 preference for "federal" over "foederal". And yes, useless redirects are a maintenance burden and should be deleted with extreme prejudice. The hypothetical redirect Fedderral rePUbliK of jermeny would have a clear, unambiguous target, and it should still be deleted as useless. The only resource intensive part of this is having to deal with the people that show up here arguing to keep these because "oh noes someone might delete a precious redirect" or something. Come on, enough is enough already. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:04, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- archaic: No longer in ordinary use, though still used occasionally to give a sense of antiquity and are still likely to be understood by well-educated speakers and are found in historical texts. I don't buy the argument that it's useless, but useless redirects should be left alone. Only harmful redirects should be deleted. The effort to delete them is much more resource-intensive than it would be to keep it in place. -- Tavix (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- The reason it shouldn't exist is that it's useless. No one is plausibly going to use the archaic spelling (do you even know what archaic means?), and if they do, they should have no expectation that it would work. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Weak delete there is under one page of google hits of which all but two appear to be wikipedia or scrapers, suggesting this is in fact a very unlikely error. The two that don't seem to be scrapers look like transcription errors rather than a deliberate use of the archaic form. On the other hand, it's harmless and unambigious. Rusalkii (talk) 21:46, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Weak keep. "Foederal" is a legitimate obsolete spelling of "Federal". BD2412 T 03:46, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- delete. can't really see what would give an archaic (out of fashion, no longer in regular use), obsolete (powercrept, outdated) spelling of a word affinity with a country that not only doesn't even have english as its primary language, but whose existence under the name "germany" seems to postdate the word going out of style. also, germany has replaced œ with ö, which is kinda funny consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 11:15, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete, while "foederal" is an archaic spelling of "federal" it's not useful when referring to a state that in this form only began its existence in 1949. Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 01:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete, while föderal (on typewriters without umlauts spelt foederal) is the German translation of federal, this mix of German and English is of no use. And as an English word it never was in existence since the founding of the Bundesrepublik. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 07:36, 24 October 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).
Jaques strappe
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29#Jaques strappe
- 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 Multiplication sign#Unicode and HTML entities. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 06:26, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
this is unicode character u+2062, or "invisible times", apparently used for when you want to multiply two numbers together but are too lazy to add a visible multiplication sign. ignoring how long it actually took me to find that and question why it exists, my suggestion will be to either refine to #notation or unrefine entirely to follow other redirects from notation consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 18:12, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget Multiplication sign#Unicode and HTML entities. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget per @Hyphenation Expert. Drunk Experiter (she/her) (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete This redirect is not linked to, except for this discussion and three user pages. It is confusing: the notification that led me here seem buggy and the header of this section seems empty. It is not a plausible search term. (This does not mean that I would be against a redirect Invisible times.) D.Lazard (talk) 01:47, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
- @D.Lazard as mentioned in the nom, it's an invisible character, so it's kind of inherently mired in semi-buggy jank lmao. sometimes i wish they'd just show up as  or something when used on their own, but alas, they'll have to suffer the same fate as the dreaded zwnj
- actually, yeah, why does this thing exist? i haven't really found any confirmation that it's for text to speech programs and stuff, or whether or not they even recognize this consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 13:06, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:35, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep or retarget It's an {{R from Unicode}}, which we tend to have so people can find information on the character or what it represents. I note the current target, Multiplication#Implicit, is the specific bullet within Multiplication#Notation that describes what this character represents, while the alternative Multiplication sign#Unicode and HTML entities is probably the best for what the character is. I have no preference between these options. Anomie⚔ 22:53, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:24, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget to Multiplication sign#Unicode and HTML entities per Hyphenation Expert and Anomie. I agree that the real-world utility of this redirect is low relative to characters that are more common and at least visible (!) but this is in line with how we typically handle these. We have content on this and there are users who search Wikipedia for characters, glyphs, etc. knowing that they are often explained—I'm one of those users. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 17:42, 22 October 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).
Tertiary reference works
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Tertiary reference worksTertiary reference works → Tertiary source (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Created because of a line on WP:RWW, but this is not mentioned anywhere on the page, nor does it seem to be a likely synonym. Tertiary sources are not necessarily "reference works". Utopes (talk / cont) 07:28, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
- Not all tertiary sources are reference works, but aren't all tertiary reference works tertiary sources? --MYCETEAE 🍄🟫—talk 20:50, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Heck, I think the target article needs a new name since a "tertiary source" (or heck, even a "secondary source") doesn't necessarily refer to references or documents. I've heard the phrases used quite a bit when it comes to secondary or tertiary sources of electricity for a building or device. (Yeah, this is a discussion for a different time, but still ... I just realized that there seems to be no mention of this concept on the English Wikipedia.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. It's a reasonable synonym or at least an important category of tertiary source. The target describes tertiary sources that are reference works, such as encyclopedias and dictionaries. It provides a broader definition of tertiary source and addresses some of the ambiguity with the terminology. This redirect is unlikely to cause confusion. --MYCETEAE 🍄🟫—talk 17:58, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC) - Keep per stonkingly good rational above. Funny how keeps get relisted deletes get … er … deleted. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 09:11, 22 October 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).
Secret of Life
- The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion was retarget to The Secret of Life. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Secret of LifeSecret of Life → Secret O' Life (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not sure this makes sense as a redirect. While this is obviously a natural mishearing/spelling for "Secret O' Life", it's a very common phrase. We have a number of plausible other targets, including the three at The Secret of Life. Possibly this should be added to the dab and redirected there? Rusalkii (talk) 22:57, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
- Common phrases notwithstanding, the James Taylor song specifically gets cited and released under this variant title. — HipLibrarianship talk 00:20, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Keep, seems reasonable enough. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 08:47, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget The Secret of Life: Partners, Volume Two has 2,519 views, the song has 183 and the album has 66 compared with only 221[] for Secret O' Life. Given the other 3 uses all use "Secret of Life" rather than "Secret O' Life" (apart from the article and sub title) I would argue that the other uses are more likely than the current target. Perhaps per WP:DABNAME the DAB should be moved here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget to dab page The Secret of Life. The secret of life is a common phrase and (when capitalized) is the title of several works. Secret of Life isn't substantially closer to Secret O' Life or The Secret of Life as a PTM. And yes, add Secret O' Life to the dab page. It's very similar and apparently the James Taylor song is sometimes styled this way. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 00:13, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- DAB here. Move entries from The Secret of Life to Secret of Life; redirect from former to the latter. — HipLibrarianship talk 02:09, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Move The Secret of Life to Secret of Life. (Simpler way of saying (and doing) the same as above.) All the best: Rich Farmbrough 09:33, 22 October 2025 (UTC).
- Retarget to the dab page as ambiguous. I oppose moving the dab to this title as the dab has more entries containing "the" than without it. mwwv converse∫edits 13:06, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Agree — don't change the dab page name. It includes three The Secret of Life's, one Secret O' Life, and not a single Secret of Life. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 15:21, 22 October 2025 (UTC)- Comment — For the sake of comparison: The Meaning of Life redirects to Meaning of Life (disambiguation) (without "the"). — HipLibrarianship talk 23:30, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Retarget to DAB page. It is a common phrase. LDW5432 (talk) 18:04, 22 October 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).
Critical range
- 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. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 13:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Very general term. Not mentioned in target, and the chaos meaning doesn't seem to be primary. The first page of google hits is almost entirely RPG related, but we don't have any content on that. Rusalkii (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Dabify would be nice, if anyone can do it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 09:14, 22 October 2025 (UTC).
- delete as hopelessly vague. results i got were either assorted math stuff or a recurring gameplay element in monster hunter games... but the latter is actually called "critical distance", so i have no idea what it's doing there. no wiktionary entry either consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 12:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as vague. Steel1943 (talk) 14:09, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as vague. This has a variety of specific uses that we don't use or define on en-wiki so there is nothing to dab. It's also a rather generic phrase that can appear in any number of unrelated contexts. —Myceteae🍄🟫(talk) 17:51, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete per above; disambiguation is a stretch and I don't suppose a retarget to wikisource:The American Practical Navigator/Glossary would be very appreciated. J947 ‡ edits 20:55, 23 October 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
~