Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 20

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 20, 2025.

User:SeanTheYeti452/sandbox projects

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. ✗plicit 00:03, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

These redirects cross namespaces, and thus are unhelpful to the user. There is no significant page history; the page history indicates that these were simply created as redirects and maintained for some reason. They stand in contrast to other cross-namespace redirects by the same user that do have a significant page history, such as his sandboxes 38 and 39. I'm not sure what needs to be done, but I would argue delete. TNstingray (talk) 21:12, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep all. Redirects from user subpages to other namespaces are completely harmless and should be left alone unless the relevant user wishes otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all redirects among
. Inappropriate redirect that crosses namespaces. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:23, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Note the three of these additions that I randomly spot-checked, user:SeanTheYeti452/sandbox/project82, user:SeanTheYeti452/sandbox/project27 and user:SeanTheYeti452/sandbox/project50 are not redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 22:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
@Thryduulf: Note, I did not nominate the user's existing sandbox pages nor proper redirects with page history. However, for the ones I did nominate, I think it is a dangerous precedent to say that anybody can create as many userspace pages as they want and redirect those to mainspace as they please. Namespaces were created for a reason, per the essay WP:CROSS. If we don't want to delete them entirely, that is fine, but they need to be blanked at the very least. I volunteer to do this if necessary, and I will do so upon the closing of this RfD unless otherwise noted. TNstingray (talk) 17:10, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
You haven't articulated any reason why any of these pages are problematic in any way, let alone harmful. The WP:CROSS essay does not mention anything about redirects from userspace to mainspace. Thryduulf (talk) 21:23, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
Keep; no issue with such redirects from userspace (unless there are WP:U5 concerns or the like, which is clearly not the case here since these are {{R from move}}s). 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:33, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Are they "R from move"s though? There is no significant page history on all of the ones I've nominated, I did not check the others provided by Taylor 49 (besides 38 and 39, which are redirects from userspace with page history). The ones I nominated appear to have been created as redirects. TNstingray (talk) 21:36, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
FYI, the history basically resets when a move is performed, because the history is moved to the new page. Every move leaves behind a redirect to the new page and has a single edit history (until moved again and retargeted, etc.). -2pou (talk) 01:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Keep All: Per other users who concur. --Cinemaniac86TalkStalk 22:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep all per Thryduulf. Steel1943 (talk) 16:43, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep all, these appear to be redirects from page moves (at least the first three, which I spot-checked), and there is wide latitude to what is acceptable to have in userspace. In the same way as redirects from accepted drafts are usually kept, so should redirects from userspace drafts. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Chaotic Enby @Thryduulf: When you look at the page histories, the redirects I nominated have either one edit (the creation of the redirect) or two edits (+ a bot fixing a double redirect). Some of the articles (ex. Luna Lovegood, which I spot-checked from project71) were not even created by User:SeanTheYeti452, meaning as far as the evidence I have in front of me, these sandbox pages were just created as redirects. Surely that is not within the realm of what userspace is intended to be used for... do we want users creating (and then Wikipedia maintaining) hundreds, thousands, even millions of cross-namespace redirects?
    Also to be clear, User:Taylor 49 is the one who nominated all of this user's sandbox pages, and I do not agree with their reasoning. Some of them are proper sandboxes; others are proper redirects with page history to the relevant character article. I checked each one and nominated the ones that should not cross namespaces. As I conceded above, maybe "keep" (aka "do nothing") will win per consensus, and I will respect that, but at the very least the redirects themselves should be emptied to avoid setting a bizarre precedent. TNstingray (talk) 23:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
    Looking at the relevant part of the page history for Luna Lovegood, as well as the page's logs, the earlier creation date was due to a history merge, which is sometimes necessary for attribution. The later version of the page (created in 2020) was in fact created by SeanTheYeti452 in their userspace, before being moved to the current title (leaving, in its previous place, a redirect with a single-edit history). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:58, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
    Surely that is not within the realm of what userspace is intended to be used for... do we want users creating (and then Wikipedia maintaining) hundreds, thousands, even millions of cross-namespace redirects? what maintenance is required? Unless the pages are actively harmful (no evidence has been presented of this) or are NOTWEBHOST violations (again, there is no evidence of this - and indeed I can't think of a way redirects to Wikipedia pages could be) then there is absolutely no benefit to deletion. Nominating unproblematic redirects for deletion wastes editors' time and is thus what is actually harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 00:33, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Thryduulf: I'm sorry for wasting your time. NOTWEBHOST is definitely applicable, despite this type of situation not being specifically mentioned, but as always the letter of the law prevails over the spirit of the law. Maybe we just haven't reached the threshold yet for you to see how this is definitely an issue, like maybe once we reach sandbox/project1000000... maybe I've cost more storage space than I've saved by trying to help, and if that's the case, I'm sorry. If the page history has been moved, there is no reason for the redirect to be maintained as opposed to blanking the sandbox (contrast to his projects 38 and 39, which do still have page history). TNstingray (talk) 12:42, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
    Why is NOTWEBHOST applicable? What is the spirit of that rule that you think this doesn't meet? We routinely keep {{R from move}} redirects in other situations, how and why is this one different? Why is blanking better than redirection? Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Thryduulf: The spirit of NOTWEBHOST connects back to the content guidelines at WP:USER, which states that user space are mainly for interpersonal discussion, notices, testing and drafts (often using sandboxes), and limited autobiographical and personal content. You would be correct in saying that the letter of NOTWEBHOST specifically restricts using Wikipedia as a web host. My argument is that the mass creation/storage of userspace redirects serves no editing, drafting, or navigational purpose for the encyclopedia. Thus, I suppose this has become a philosophical conversation about project scope and maintenance rather than unprecedented policy violations.
    "R from move" does not apply for the specific pages I nominated because they do not preserve any edit history, unlike the active sandboxes and redirects created elsewhere by the same user that I did not nominate (these were tacked on by User:Taylor 49, and I believe this has at least partially undermined my argument and intention).
    Finally, blanking is my attempt to compromise between our visions (I think it would be appropriate to describe you as an Inclusionist, and I would describe myself as a Deletionist, or maybe a Mergist on a good day... none of these is inherently better than the other, it is just my observation). At the end of the day, I would like to maintain the integrity between distinct namespaces and free these user sandboxes to be utilized for their proper function- as sandboxes, not redirects. One day, storage will be an issue, and maybe I'm way too early to be worrying about that, but I have nothing else to add to this matter. Thank you for your valuable time, attention, and consideration. TNstingray (talk) 20:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
    TNstingray, deleting pages uses rather than saves storage space. Their histories don't disappear; they remain visible to admins and researchers, and a deletion log entry is created. Also, WP:DWAP. J947 ‡ edits 01:33, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep all - I believe cross-namespace is really only a problem if it were redirecting from main into userspace (or draftspace), as this would allow indexed navigation to these pages and bypass any notability requirements. Additionally, I have always understood userspace to be each editor's area where they can work on wikipedia-related content. Not using WP as a webhost would be for things like your personal list of favorite foods, or blogging things, etc. I could see a use where the editor may have an index of WP pages they are interested in editing (created by them or not), but they keep the mapping separate and private and then use those redirects to get to the intended destination. I keep my own to do list fairly cryptic. These seem WP:CHEAP and harmless to me. -2pou (talk) 20:33, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
    I wrote "Delete all redirects among" meaning that pages that are NOT redirects among those automatically listed subpages are NOT part of the set that I want to get deleted. Taylor 49 (talk) 09:01, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all Many violate WP:STALEDRAFT as old drafts not edited for numerous years. Others, such as pure redirects, are technically allowed, but would be uncontroversial maintenance to delete given that they serve no real purpose. The arguments here fall under the lines of "there is no reason to delete" without actually noting a single reason to retain them besides being "harmless". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:59, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
    Although a number of drafts have been posted over the course of discussion, I think this is meant to focus on the redirects. That said, I'm not seeing how STALEDRAFT necessarily supports deletion when this is in user space. The only criteria that might apply is #6. Are we reaching consensus that none of these have any further potential? Those cases should be taken to MfD, though, not here. The first line says it's most common to ignore those. Back to the redirects, though, under the only deletion option in STALEDRAFT, a note also states Note: Redirects from userspace subpages to mainspace are common and acceptable. Wikipedia:Soft redirect is an alternative considered preferable by some. -2pou (talk) 17:22, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep and tag as valid {{r from draft}}s, and per WP:R#K5. The non-redirects should be checked against WP:STALEDRAFT #2/3/5, the others are not likely to apply.
    @TNstingray: Please note that WP:R#D6 (XNR) does not apply here: It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space (my emphasis) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradoctor (talk • contribs) 10:35, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep all per Thryduulf. Regardless of anything else, it's perfectly legitimate to keep placeholder blank or almost blank sandbox pages up in one's own userspace for whatever reason. Redirects qualify as almost blank. These pages have no impact on anyone but the user in question. J947 ‡ edits 01:18, 27 September 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).

Harry potter prophecy

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 00:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Which prophecy is this referring to? The character Harry Potter is the subject of a prophecy prior to the series beginning. Another prophecy features prominently in the third book, speaking of Peter Pettigrew. Another prophecy is involved in the play if I remember correctly. Delete as an unclear and unhelpful redirect. TNstingray (talk) 21:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete, possibly referring to different points in the series makes it an unhelpful search term. Suonii180 (talk) 19:06, 22 September 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).

Jack Sloper

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 00:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Extremely minor background character. No feasible reason for this redirect to exist nor for the character to be added anywhere on the encyclopedia. Kindly Delete. TNstingray (talk) 21:02, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete, not mentioned. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:32, 27 September 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).

April 19,1995

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 00:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:UNNATURAL way of formatting the date. (Whether the correctly formatted version of this redirect is even necessary is a separate question.) — Anonymous 19:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Comment for clarity the "unnaturalness" here is a missing space following the comma. April 19, 1995 also redirects to the same target (and has done since 2005). 19 April 1995 is a redlink and always has been. Thryduulf (talk) 20:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete for spacing error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete for spacing error. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:24, 23 September 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).

Online music store

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 procedural close. as nom is voting logged out multiple times just like in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#XfD (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

How does an online music store redirects to digital music store? I suggest retarget to music store because an online music store sells physical audio files. 74.195.77.161 (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete as vague, weak keep as more plausible than retargeting to Music store. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:01, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
74.195.77.161 (talk) 04:29, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Paper Mario The Fandom Editor (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Are you agreeing with my comment, @Reset9290? The wording is confusing me slightly. Remember to put new comments in discussions under older ones. Also, in future, if your reasoning for your stance in a discussion is the same as another editor's, you can simply write "agree per [username]". — Anonymous 21:36, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Having dug a little deeper, I am now even more confused by this user. It appears they may be the same person as the IP that started this discussion, as the two have a history of close interaction, are particularly interested in redirects, and leave similarly unintelligible comments in discussions. — Anonymous 23:04, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
The section Online stores is unsourced. I suggest as retarget to Music store (section Online stores). 74.195.77.161 (talk) 04:32, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete: Having a specific term redirect to a less specific page is generally unhelpful. — Anonymous 19:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep as-is since "physical audio files" are NOT physical, and they ARE digital. Alternatively Retarget to Music store since an online music store theoretically at least can sell physical non-digital gramophone records too. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    An online music store may still sell physical CDs/cassettes/records (I think this is what the nominator meant to say). 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:21, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
    (Apart from the fact that an online music store may just sell musical instruments and other equipment as well.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Music store, which currently has some coverage of online stores as well (though the section on "Online stores" specifically is unsourced). I also added a hatnote to Digital music store to that article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:32, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Uh-oh. We somehow wound up with two open discussions about this redirect. The other one is at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 18#Online music store. - Eureka Lott 13:34, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
The following was the content of duplicate discussion Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 18#Online music store prior to it being closed:
More information Discussion from duplicate RfD ...
Close
– Steel1943 (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
@Myceteae, Consarn, and Eureka Lott: Pinging you as the participants of the duplicate discussion which have not technically voted in this discussion yet (provided it is anything contrary to the duplicate discussion I have included above). Steel1943 (talk) 15:59, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
On a related note, though I am obviously WP:INVOLVED, I have closed Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 18#Online music store as a duplicate discussion and have directed participants who read the duplicate discussion to this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 16:05, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
@Steel1943, thanks for cleaning this up! --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
lmao whomst is this consarn consarn (grave) (obituary) 16:29, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Weak retarget to Music store#Online stores and repeat the hatnote to Digital music store (and *maybe* Record shop) in this section. 'Weak' because I have some nagging doubt about the primary topic but a preliminary Google search is largely consistent with this usage. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:36, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • which option would you rather choose? retarget to Music store#Online stores or delete as unhelpful redirect target? (do not use the keep option) 74.195.77.161 (talk) 14:09, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
  • :thonk:... should this also be procedurally closed due to socking concerns (and unhelpful, barely coherent comments and duplicate votes) above? consarn (grave) (obituary) 12:28, 1 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).

Most intense vortices

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 00:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unlikely and vague search term to what is clearly not the only primary topic. Created as a BOLD redirect by @WeatherWriter: of an article by @Bruhhhhh789014: and WeatherWriter's summary in redirecting also states WP:BOLD merge as the article is a chart related to the 2013 El Reno tornado. Redirect itself is probably not valid, but the chart was merged, so a redirect is necessary for editor history to be preserved. - as this is for attribution I'm not sure what exactly to do with it but as is the redirect at Most intense vortices seems to be wrong to me. Departure– (talk) 16:29, 20 September 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).

Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)/Archive

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#Jimmy Carter (disambiguation)/Archive

Eat (disambiguation)/ESA

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. CSD’d G7. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 05:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

More unnatural redirects, all leftovers of Move+ Duckmather (talk) 15:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • I wouldn't object to speedying these as created in error. Thryduulf (talk) 21:00, 20 September 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).

C&A Bank GmbH

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 00:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

None of these subsidiaries or brands have any useful coverage anywhere on the English Wikipedia (passing mentions like at Hans Vandekerckhove are not reasonable targets). 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:01, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete all per nom. See my comment at the C&A Bank discussion. This covers C&A Bank GmbH and the source also mentions C&A Money. Regarding Cora (brand), several unrelated brand are named Cora, from period products to Italian food. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:03, 23 September 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).

Sneeker Kring

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. Rusalkii (talk) 04:36, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Only mentioned in an image caption at the Brenninkmeijer family article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:56, 20 September 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).

C&A Bank

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 00:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

No mention at target; unrelated "C & A Bank" is described at Samuel May Williams, and I am not sure whether the spelling difference is sufficient to potentially prefer showing the readers that we do not have content on the C&A subsidiary. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:53, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete. As far as I can tell, Cofra Holding, which owns the retailer C&A, used to own C&A Bank GmbH but sold it and changed its name around 2013. It's not mentioned at Cofra Holding and was a separate entity from the retailer, and the new company, Bank11 or Bank11 direkt, isn't covered on en-wiki. I can't find much coverage to confirm this but there's no evidence to support the current target or any other. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:58, 23 September 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).

Rebecca (disambiguation)/Eureka transponding radar

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. CSD’d G6/G7. (non-admin closure) Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:24, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Seems like an unnatural title for a redirect; disambiguation pages don't normally have subpages Duckmather (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Oh no, I have actually requested for an admin to help me merge histories and delete the redirect. The redirect shouldn’t be deleted without history merge. I literally forgot to untick the leave a redirect checkbox while making that move. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:53, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
@Vanderwaalforces: At this point, there seems to be no history at this redirect. Time for a WP:G6 or WP:G7, maybe? Steel1943 (talk) 17:06, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
Ah, let me try that! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:29, 21 September 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).

European people (disambiiguation)

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 00:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

The parenthetical is misspelled (disambiguation -> disambiiguation, notice the extra i!), so delete per WP:RDAB Duckmather (talk) 14:50, 20 September 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).

I Know Your Name

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#I Know Your Name

Lucia, Saint

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. G7: The creator of the redirects (FaroeFO) has requested deletion, in this discussion. JBW (talk) 16:12, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

These are not people's names and aren't written like this. Delete. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:38, 20 September 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).

Zote the Mighty

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 00:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

No mention at target. Included at 57 (number) but might not warrant to be so there either. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:32, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom (and it's not mentioned at 57 anymore :)) 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 01:49, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete Zote is indeed a character in the game, but is a comic relief joke character with zero overarching relevance to the plot. As there is no reason to include him in the plot summary, it should be deleted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • either add all the 57 precepts to the target and at least as many images of invincible, fearless, sensual, mysterious, enchanting, vigorous, diligent, overwhelming, gorgeous, passionate, terrifying, beautiful, powerful, grey prince zote... or just delete per nom consarn (grave) (obituary) 11:46, 22 September 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).

WorldWarI

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 00:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:UNNATURAL spacing. Tagged as {{R from CamelCase}} but created in 2022. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:13, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Seems a likely typo to me. Slatersteven (talk) 14:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete both. The necessity for CamelCase titles was deprecated around 2005; the creation of such redirects, these being created in 2022, is both unneeded and unlikely as search terms. Steel1943 (talk) 16:39, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete both per nom and above comments. TNstingray (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete both per nom and Steel1943. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:05, 23 September 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).

Today's Secret Word

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 any that did not receive objections: keep Toy Food, retarget Today's Secret Word to Pee-wee's Playhouse, and retarget Hyakugojyuuichi 2003 to Animutation. This is without prejudice against speedy individual renomination. -- Tavix (talk) 15:26, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

No adequate mentions of these anywhere on the English Wikipedia. As a sidenote, I spent a good hour looking up each redirect individually. Not a big deal, but I do think that if unhelpful redirects can be mass-created in this manner there should be a way to mass-delete them without too much trouble as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:50, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Goodness, that's a lot of redirects. We could probably retarget some of these to more appropriate places:
-insert valid name here- (talk) 19:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for finding the first one. I saw the second one but since the target does not mention 2003 I questioned the suitability. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:57, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all unmentioned anywhere else on wiki, renominate all mentioned individually to avoid a trainwreck nomination. Note that "Toy Food" is mentioned in the target: ; I'm a keep on that one. Also, since I ran my usual RfD script on all of these, to save the future closer the trouble of checking, none of these have any non-redirect history. Rusalkii (talk) 04:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all except Toy Food per Rusalkii. It seems plausible that several of these titles may have alternative usees, but none of them actually do (there being no encyclopaedic use of "Fire motif" was particularly surprising to me) so there is nowhere to retarget them to. Thryduulf (talk) 13:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete except Toy Food - Thanks to Rusalkii for doing extensive legwork on the mass nom. -2pou (talk) 21:53, 28 September 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).

Flamingo Legs

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#Flamingo Legs

Sky Is Not Blue

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#Sky Is Not Blue

When Robots Attack

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 00:06, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned at target; random (unrelated) passing mentions at Space Museum (comics) and Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen would not seem to be appropriate targets. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:40, 20 September 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).

What Will Happen Will Happen

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#What Will Happen Will Happen

Consumer Whore

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. Rusalkii (talk) 04:35, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target; the "in popular culture" entry at Rejected is probably insufficient (and I am not sure whether it should exist in the first place). 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:21, 20 September 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).

Peper and Salt

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 Pepper and salt. Rusalkii (talk) 19:02, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target; also misspelt. Not sure if redirecting to Pepper and salt is useful/plausible. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:16, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget per nom. At least two of the entries on that dab page are capitalised. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    I am not extremely convinced about the plausibility of the misspelling in the first word of a three-word phrase. (FTR, Peper is a disambiguation page and does not help readers get to pepper either.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retargetting to Pepper and salt is useful/plausible per Thryduulf. Peper being a dab page is less important, as "and salt" makes it related to the pepper and salt context. Jay 💬 07:21, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Pepper and Salt per Thryduulf. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:09, 28 September 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).

Market to Market

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 30#Market to Market

Drinky-Bird

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 Drinking bird. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

No mention at target; not sure if this spelling should be redirected to Drinking bird or deleted. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:06, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Retarget to drinking bird ("drinky bird" is bolded in the lead, and this is plausible alternative spelling of that). Second choice is delete. Thryduulf (talk) 13:28, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Drinking bird. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:12, 23 September 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).

320x200

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#320x200

Template:Category move

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) 17:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

unused. For (semi-automated) data analysis (e.g. with Petscan) the number of redirects should be as low as possible Estopedist1 (talk) 11:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep all harmless; I expressly disagree that "make some external tool happy" is a valid reason for deletion of a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per User:Pppery. I agree tools should not drive this. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per Pppery and Timrollpickering. Tools should be adjusted to deal with the encyclopaedia rather than adjusting the encyclopaedia to deal with tools. Thryduulf (talk) 21:04, 20 September 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).

Template:Cat red

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) 17:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

misleading, now unused. For (semi-automated) data analysis (e.g. with Petscan) the number of redirects should be as low as possible Estopedist1 (talk) 11:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep all harmless; I expressly disagree that "make some external tool happy" is a valid reason for deletion of a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per User:Pppery. I agree tools should not drive this. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per Pppery and Timrollpickering. Tools should be adjusted to deal with the encyclopaedia rather than adjusting the encyclopaedia to deal with tools. Thryduulf (talk) 21:05, 20 September 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).

Template:Category Redirect

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) 17:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

now unused. For (semi-automated) data analysis (e.g. with Petscan) the number of redirects should be as low as possible Estopedist1 (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep all harmless; I expressly disagree that "make some external tool happy" is a valid reason for deletion of a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per User:Pppery. I agree tools should not drive this. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per Pppery and Timrollpickering. Tools should be adjusted to deal with the encyclopaedia rather than adjusting the encyclopaedia to deal with tools. Thryduulf (talk) 21:05, 20 September 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).

Togore

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. Rusalkii (talk) 18:56, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target, apart from a commune by the name of Togoré-Coumbé at Communes of Mali (and previously two misspelt names which I have now fixed). 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete - unclear what this is. Jay 💬 17:40, 29 September 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).

Togore Dreemurr

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. Rusalkii (talk) 04:34, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

No mention anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:35, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete; "Togore" is a potential alternate name/sibling for Asriel/alternate name for Kris Dreemurr that became a minor meme in the UT/DR fandom a while ago; nowhere near notable enough for inclusion here. "Grandpa Semi", meanwhile, is a name that only showed up as the filename for an (originally) unused sound effect in the code of Undertale; in a later patch it was renamed to "grandpatemi" and used during fights with Temmie. Also very much not notable. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:32, 20 September 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).

Space Train

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#Space Train

Psycho RC

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 00:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

No mentions anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:02, 20 September 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).

Stranded Lullaby

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 00:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:59, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep. The album Hawaii Part: II is mentioned and songs from it are plausible search terms. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 15:46, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. These redirects are confusing without a mention. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:19, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete as unmentioned. Readers looking for these terms at the target will not find information about the subjects they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 17:08, 21 September 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).

She was more like a beauty queen from a movie scene

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 00:07, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned lyric. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete, unlikely search term. Popcornfud (talk) 13:37, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 01:51, 21 September 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).

CLEVELAND!! This is for you.

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 00:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned quote. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:43, 20 September 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 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 00:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:39, 20 September 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).

Oliver and COmpany

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 00:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Appear to be WP:UNNATURAL. All created by the same user. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:19, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Gonnym (talk) 10:41, 21 September 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).

Absitively posolutely!

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 00:08, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned; there is wikt:absitively posolutely (and a random mention at Braingames (1983 TV series)). 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete for no mention. The wikt entry in not helpful. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:32, 21 September 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).

Lists of Japanese Governors-General (disambiguation)

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. Rusalkii (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete. "Lists of Japanese Governors-General" (plural) is not ambiguous. The target is not a disambiguation page. The target is also not a disambiguation-like page that lists different uses of "Lists of Japanese Governors-General". This page serves no purpose whatsoever. This deletion should have been carried out administratively, but G14 was removed by an IP editor. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:46, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Comment the IP editor was absolutely right to oppose the speedy deletion - the target is a page that performs a disambiguation-like function. I'm not sure whether this is a useful redirect or not, but it's not speediable. Thryduulf (talk) 10:25, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Comment User:Shhhnotsoloud the tag was removed because it did not apply. Please stop tagging pages for speedy that do not meet any of the criteria and list them here if you want them deleted. As you no doubt have experienced, the effort required to do so is minimal. I otherwise have no opinion on this redirect. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 15:26, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
The target cannot be a disambiguation-like page on the subject of "Lists of Japanese Governors-General", because, to repeat, it is not ambiguous and does not require any disambiguation. The target might be a disambiguation-like page on the subject of "List of Japanese Governors-General", but that's not what I nominated. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:56, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
User:Shhhnotsoloud, lists are an explicit example of pages performing a disambiguation-like function that make redirects targeting them ineligible for WP:G14; please read the criteria again, read it twice if you have to, and maybe consider that if three people in this very discussion are telling you that your interpretation of policy is wrong you might not know what you are talking about. Don't like that? Go to WT:CSD and ask there but everyone else will tell you the same. In the meantime please stop wasting everyone else's time with bad speedy tags. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 18:16, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
@Shhhnotsoloud it doesn't matter what subjects are referred to by either the redirect or the target page, even something as obviously unrelated as Seventeen ducks (disambiguation) redirecting to Lists of Japanese governors-general would not be eligible for G14 speedy deletion. The only thing that matters is whether the target page is a disambiguation page or performs a disambiguation-like function for any topic(s). Thryduulf (talk) 10:30, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion#RfC on G14 for redirects. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:27, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Leaning weak delete as creator of the redirect (which was to a page marked as a disambiguation page at the time). I did have the thought that there is potential ambiguity if we consider Douglass MacArthur to have been a "Japanese Governor-General" in the sense that he was a general who governed Japan; and that there could potentially be people of ethnically Japanese descent who served as Governor-General of places without being representatives of the government of Japan in this capacity, but MacArthur is never referred to by this title, and we have no information in the encyclopedia on persons in the other category. I do agree with Thryduulf and the IP above that this is not a good speedy deletion case. BD2412 T 16:21, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input… since the only !vote from participants so far is a "weak delete".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
... and a delete from the nominator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:34, 21 September 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).

Ralsei Smoking a Fat Blunt

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 1#Ralsei Smoking a Fat Blunt

Oil and gas law

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 Energy law. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 21:43, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Oil and gas law does not solely exist in the United States. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:19, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete or retarget. As it stands this is clearly incorrect - a substantial portion of the articles in Category:Oil and gas law related to the UK for example. As for what to do, I'm presently torn between deletion per WP:REDLINK and retargetting to the broader topic Energy law. I considered disambiguation, but I think that would be less useful than either of the previous two options - I'm happy to reconsider this if others feel differently though. Thryduulf (talk) 10:53, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to energy law, secondary preference for deletion; I essentially echo Thryduulf's thinking on this front. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:09, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:07, 20 September 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).

Counting or not counting gang violence?

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 7#Counting or not counting gang violence?

My mom is kind of homeless

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 00:09, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

The target does not talk about any mom or homelessness apart from the title of one reference, but even if it did, it does not mention this particular phrase or "meme" whatsoever. 1234qwer1234qwer4 06:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete every niche internet meme does not have to be added to Wikipedia as a redirect to the main target article. This isn't KnowYourMeme. I've been seeing this happen a lot recently with Category:Internet memes introduced in 2025 for example. For goodness sake, we do not need "Obama Have Dih" as a redirect. B3251(talk) 22:14, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete for no mention. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:41, 21 September 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).

Wobbly Wiggly

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. Rusalkii (talk) 04:33, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Unmentioned, apart from a source at the target containing "Wobble and Wiggle" in the title. 1234qwer1234qwer4 06:54, 20 September 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).

If the world was ending, I'd wanna be next to you

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#If the world was ending, I'd wanna be next to you

Doosan Mottrol

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 00:09, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Subsidiary of the company () not mentioned in target. Rusalkii (talk) 06:41, 20 September 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).

Shout shout let it all out

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 27#Shout shout let it all out

My pay

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 and refine to Leave and earnings statement § Delivery. The consensus was for keeping; however, it was generally determined it should be tracking MyPayMyPay. Also adding {{R avoided double redirect|MyPay}}. (non-admin closure) Casablanca 🪨(T) 21:20, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Generic phrase. Article discusses a system called MyPay, but I think the WP:DIFFCAPS prevent this from being a useful non-ambiguous redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 06:21, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep synchronised with "MyPay". However that title I think is ambiguous as I don't think the mentions at the target, Portlaoise#Economy, Chime (company)#Products, Bhutan National Bank and The Progressive Accountant#Contributors all refer to the same thing (especially as the last one is stylised "myPay" but I'm undecided if any of these topics merit a dabmention. Regardless, "My Pay" is a plausible misspelling of MyPay, especially for those who have heard of it but not seen it written, and all the uses of "my pay" are either mid-sentence collocations or partial title matches. Thryduulf (talk) 11:06, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. Plausible misspelling of MyPay, which is the standard payment system for the entire U.S. military and easily the most significant/notable usage of the term.⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 22:57, 21 September 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).

George Zinn (activist)

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. Jay 💬 06:30, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Non-public figure who will not be mentioned at target article for BLP-related reasons, to the extent that an edit filter prevents it. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 06:10, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete for BLP reasons. There is no doubt this person played a tiny role in the event, but all thing considered (including the reports of his mental health) says we probably should respect his privacy and just delete and maybe salt this. The benefit of keeping it is miniscule compared to the potential damage. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 08:55, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    I just semi-protected George Zinn for 1 year as someone already put in a hat note pointing to the assassination article. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 08:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    Even the Union Army have become involved in the killing Trade (talk) 13:19, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    I could make quite a cutting (imo) political comment in response to that but this is not the place! Instead I'll note that we have an article about a German politician named Georg August Zinn and I'm undecided whether they should have a hatnote from the Union Army officer's article? Thryduulf (talk) 21:14, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    That hatnote kind of makes sense, although I doubt either article gets tons of traffic. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:03, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    Neither normally gets a ton of traffic, but the politician is usually more popular than the army officer. For some reason we can probably both guess, they've both gone from less than 20 hits a day to several hundreds or (in the latter's case) thousands a day since the middle of this month. Thryduulf (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
    I expected as much. There is also a AFD for the stand alone article on the alleged assassin, btw. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete, per BLP. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:55, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Dennis Brown. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:24, 23 September 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).

Useful Basque phrases

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 Per Tavix * Pppery * it has begun... 23:27, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

There are no real useful Basque phrases contained at the target. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 15:22, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

  • My hovercraft is full of eeeels (delete). Definitely not useful as a redirect. And there's history, but it was just someone recording a handful of random words and phrases that didn't last long, and Wikipedia is not a phrasebook anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. It doesn't appear that the content was ever moved to Basque language or any other article, so no need to keep for attribution. (If there is evidence to the contrary, that may require a different outcome.) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:41, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
    Content was indeed merged to the target, and I have tagged it as a {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 17:02, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete as not useful (heh) --Lenticel (talk) 00:54, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reverting my close to allow for consideration of Jay's finding of the merged content. Pinging Myceteae, Lenticel.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:52, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. WP:NOT. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Since Useful Basque phrases is a {{R from merge}} we should keep it for attribution. Moving the page history to a plausible title like Basque tongue should allow us to do so. The other redirect has no useful history and can be deleted. Warudo (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Move without redirect of Useful Basque phrases to Basque phrases to remove the subjective 'useful'. The target does include example phrases for grammar purposes. Delete Useful basque phrases. -- Tavix (talk) 14:36, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
    Support. Jay 💬 14:28, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
    Support. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:36, 5 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).

September 10, 2025

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 29#September 10, 2025

1.414213562373..., etc.

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 29#1.414213562373..., etc.

Hörcsög

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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:26, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete per WP:FORRED. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 04:24, 20 September 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).

-UFC 2010 Undisputed-

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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:24, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

The "-" and the front and end makes the redirect implausible A1Cafel (talk) 03:34, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete as unnecessary error or stylisation. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:52, 21 September 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).

Jew jitsu

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) 07:34, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Wordplay about subject, not critically discussed anywhere in target article. Propose deletion. BarntToust 01:35, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 02:11, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Drafted a dab at the redirect per Paradoctor. Jay 💬 12:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ edits 02:15, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • While I prefer retargeting, disambiguation works for me, too. Paradoctor (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Dabify, thus avoiding WP:X or Y problems, and including the phonetic jiu jitsu -2pou (talk) 22:12, 28 September 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).

Template:B-d

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 no consensus. Rusalkii (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

Recently created redirect which is more harmful then helpful. It currently leads to Template:Birth date text, but why not to Template:Birth date? How about Template:Birth date and age, Template:Birth date and age2, or Template:Birth date and age text? I get people want short redirects, but these templates are usually used once per article. Gonnym (talk) 18:16, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

I created this to follow the pattern laid out with {{b-da}} and {{d-da}} with both allow for the use of text dates being passed in as opposed to the multi parameters of {{bda}} and {{dda}}. —Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:33, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:14, 20 September 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 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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:24, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes#Emojis says that multiple emojis in a redirect are typically deleted. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:11, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete This redirect makes zero sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:12, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • The central character of this sequence is U+1FAEF which is a new emoji "fight cloud" with other keywords "argument | brawl | debate | disagreement | fight | ruckus | wrestle" however, it has zero width joiners either side with adult emoji and I can't find any information on what this sequence will produce. My first thought was that it might be two wrestlers, but 🤼 already exists for that. Iff nobody adds an explanation before this RfD closes, then count my comment as a "delete without prejudice to recreation with an explanation". Thryduulf (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's no evidence this is in use or even in development. A wrestling emoji already exists so the creation of a new one is as unlikely as it gets. The description of U+1FAEF suggests this could be 'two people fighting' or any number of related concepts, if such a combination were to exist. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:06, 23 September 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 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) 04:34, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes#Emojis says that multiple emojis in a redirect are typically deleted. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 02:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

@Clovermoss, I bundled this series of similar nominations for you. As for the redirects, I say keep per https://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts-17.0/emoji-released.html – while these are currently not yet rendered on most devices/in most fonts, Unicode has recently defined these ZWJ sequences as standalone emoji, in the same way many other emoji that are rendered as one character and that can be selected from an emoji keyboard are actually a sequence of characters. Thus, they are in principle plausible redirects. 1234qwer1234qwer4 06:20, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
That page appears to use a different emoji for ballet dancer, while this one is ballet shoes. I don't think this would ever be rendered as one character? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 06:26, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
The codepoint sequence shown there is exactly the one that appears here. Ballet dancer "🧑‍🩰" (also new and not rendered in most fonts yet) is "🧑" and "🩰" joined by a ZWJ character; these ones have a skin tone modifier in addition, which afaik we generally redirect to the same target as the non-toned version. 1234qwer1234qwer4 06:43, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
As for The codepoint sequence shown there is exactly the one that appears here, I'm afraid I really have no idea what you mean by that. I'm just going off of what I visually see on that page (an emoji that clearly shows a figure dancing and not shoes). If the two really do mean the same thing code-wise and the redirects are plausible, then that's fair. Since you clearly understand this concept better than I do, may I suggest you improve the phrasing at common outcomes? Right now, "Editors should be aware that emojis are often rendered differently on different systems. Titles that contain multiple emojis or mix emojis and other characters are usually deleted" doesn't really explain how ZWJ works and why that's a reason to not delete redirects. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 07:09, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Keep per 1234wer... @Clovermoss Complex emoji can be composed of multiple individual emoji, for example 🏳️‍🌈 (rainbow flag) is rendered as a single character but is actually composed of three characters: 🏳️ (white flag), a zero width joiner and 🌈 (rainbow). The new ballet dancer emoji is composed of the emoji for an adult, an optional skin tone modifier, a zero width joiner and the emoji for ballet shoes. If you are seeing two adjacent emoji then your system has not been updated with the new emoji yet. Thryduulf (talk) 11:23, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
Wait, so you're saying it displays properly when I visit that website and not here? My line of thought was that the skin tone modifier was with the figure I was seeing on that site, not the shoes. I think I get it now. I'm okay with withdrawing this. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
@Clovermoss: Best way I can explain what is happening without going to deep in the weeds is ... emoji appear differently on all operating systems. Like, on my iOS I am using, these redirects appear as two different characters, but on others, they could appear as one character. There are also cases where an operating system cause two different characters combinations to appear as the same emoji' (See ☄️ (link), for example, and the RfD: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 7#☄️: On iOS, the two redirects nominated redirects in that discussion appear as the exact same image). Steel1943 (talk) 17:41, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep per discussion above. Interesting stuff. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:38, 23 September 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).

Logging out

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 first and keep the rest as proposed by Mz7. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 01:30, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Retarget all to Special:Logout. The first one makes particularly little sense, but the alternatives presented by the targets of the other three do not seem to talk specifically about "logging out". Given that there are hatnotes in place anyway, it might also make sense to make all of them point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:17, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on Mz7's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:58, 20 September 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).

Omg!

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 both to OMG; no consensus on whether to move the history first. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:26, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

These should have the same target. I was tempted to redirect omg!omg! to the OMG dab page but it currently has 44 links in the article space which would all presumably have to be unlinked if it were redirected there since Yahoo isn’t on the dab page. Thepharoah17 (talk) 09:08, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep both redirects per WP:DIFFCAPS but add a hotnote at Yahoo News#Yahoo Celebrity to the OMG dab page. मल्ल (talk) 14:48, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget Omg! → OMG. This does not satisfy DIFFCAPS/WP:SMALLDIFFS, so the Yahoo Celebrity target is inappropriate. First, omg! is equivalent to OMG! since people commonly omit capitals when searching, and WP will render omg! as Omg!. Second, as an extremely common slang abbreviation and exclamation, it is commonly written and encountered in the wild with variable capitalization and with the exclamation point. Note that at the OMG dab page, the first entry is: Oh my God! (sometimes also Oh my Goodness! or Oh my Gosh!). Some standard dictionaries even include the ⟨!⟩ in there definition or usage examples for OMG. SMALLDIFFS applies when a particular difference in spelling, punctuation, etc. is highly unlikely to be entered except in reference to a specific target, Airplane! being a canonical example. Regarding incoming links, I spot-checked a few and every single one was used in references/citations, not in the article body. Many had additional information about the publication, e.g. "omg!. Yahoo!" and all had links to the article. The 44 incoming links may need more review and some cleanup but these citations will still be clear and accurate if the omg! points to the DAB page. I have added Yahoo Celebrity (Yahoo News#Yahoo Celebrity) under OMG#Other media. The entry may need to be edited but this should be included on the DAB page regardless of the outcome of this RfD. Keep OMG!. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:09, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
  • So, why not just move the current redirect to e.g. omg! (Yahoo)? The 44 links reflect editor behavior, not necessarily reader behavior, and readers come first. The fact that there's no redirect for the proper name "Yahoo Celebrity" doesn't bode well for the comparative significance of this topic compared to the more general one. The fact that when you follow the link to Yahoo News, and then enter "omg!" into their own search field, and this thing doesn't even come up, rather the general definition does - indicates there's little chance the average reader refers to it. Just make its title appropriately precise and be done with it. --Joy (talk) 08:44, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
    If I understand correctly, moving this would result in omg! becoming an {{R from move}}, and thus ultimately still pointing to Yahoo News#Yahoo Celebrity, or it would be deleted. Editors can create new omg! (Yahoo) or Yahoo Celebrity redirects if they think those are useful, but we should still have an omg! redirect and it should point to OMG --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:33, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Myceteae no, I mean move it in order to preserve its history, but then retarget that name to the more generic meaning. --Joy (talk) 06:19, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Joy thanks for explaining, this sounds good to me :) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:08, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
    If the current page is moved, Yahoo Celebrity appears to be the proper name for the new redirect. Unless the history of omg! should be merged with Yahoo! Celebrity. I don't have a good handle on all the implications of history merge so I'll defer to others on that, as long as omg! eventually points to OMG. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:22, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
    @Joy: What is your opinion of the proposed target of the page history, as it is different from the one you proposed? Jay 💬 14:55, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
    @Jay both are fine by me, they seem to be fairly precise and synonymous. It's okay to go with Yahoo Celebrity because that seems to be the more recent one. --Joy (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
    I also support the page move Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:21, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
@CycloneYoris do you need a better argument in favor of full disambiguation, or? --Joy (talk) 11:28, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Just asking for further input since consensus isn't entirely clear. CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
The only dissenting opinion seems to be by user @मल्ल, and they haven't followed up on the rebuttal since the 11th. (This is a ping to try to clarify that.) --Joy (talk) 11:32, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
Your proposal looks good to me. मल्ल (talk) 11:59, 27 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget omg! to the dab page per nom and Myceteae. The redirect has no page content history as such, so there is no need for a move. I should have taken a better look before I pinged the move-proposer Joy above. Jay 💬 21:24, 5 October 2025 (UTC)
    Agreed, looking at this now. It's been so long, I don't recall whether I actually looked at the history or just took Joy's word for it that there was history worth preserving. Since omg! has always been a redirect, there's no encyclopedia content to preserve and simply changing the target will actually better preserve its history as a redirect. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:36, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
    The idea with simply doing a move to a new location like omg! (Yahoo) is that we get a topical redirect that you can then use to list and link this item from the omg! disambiguation page. Anyway, can we just get this over with? :) --Joy (talk) 13:03, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
    Nothing wrong with a topic redirect at omg! (Yahoo). What MYCETEAE and I were asking is, what is the justification for the "move", which everyone seemed to support, and which is why I didn't choose to close this RfD as a closer. Jay 💬 17:10, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget both to OMG due to the lack of a primary topic and Oppose page move per WP:MOVEREDIRECT as there's no content that needs preservation. -- Tavix (talk) 16:21, 9 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).

Saint-Christophe-et-Nièves

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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:27, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Delete per WP:FORRED, no affinity between French and St. Kitts and Nevis. Thepharoah17 (talk) 01:48, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep There were French settlements on St. Kitts and Nevis for a little under 100 years in the 17th and 18th centuries, so there is at least some affinity. Casablanca 🪨(T) 21:31, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. There's even an article on the topic: French settlement in Saint Kitts and Nevis. -- Tavix (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm not sure how any reading of the article would indicate no affinity. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:11, 22 September 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).

Saint Kitts and

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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't appear to serve a purpose, and is an unlikely search term. — Hydrogenation (talk) 00:25, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete seems incomplete title and very unlikely to be used as a search term. Asteramellus (talk) 00:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Asteramellus. Thryduulf (talk) 11:36, 20 September 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).

Weezerpedia

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. Rusalkii (talk) 05:22, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

We have no content on this Fandom wiki. There is an external link at the target, which I am not sure meets WP:EL, but even then it does not provide any information to the reader. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:08, 20 September 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