Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 27

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. --BDD (talk) 00:43, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Mike OxbigMike Oxbig → Gag name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previously retained to a piece of vandalism on List of Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 2006, then retargeted to Gag name because it is, well, a gag name. However, it gets less than one view a day and is not mentioned on the target page, so between that and its link to a long-standing piece of vandalism, I think deletion is the better option here. Ten Pound Hammer (they/them) • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:16, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep since redirects are cheap and there's gag gifts on Amazon. Anyone who saw a "Mike Oxbig 2024" t-shirt was grateful Wikipedia subtly answered the question for them. BBQboffin^{grill me} 23:43, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: Since after the close of the last RfD, this redirect gets more views than Mike OxmaulMike Oxmaul and Mike OxlongMike Oxlong. The other two (and other similar plays on "Mike") are mentioned in the article. This could all be random noise but maybe we should just mention this one in the article… —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
• keep per above. nothing wrong with it User "Oreocooke" (speak of the sun and it shines) 19:54, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete unless significance can be shown at the target. There are plenty of examples in the article, but this isn't one of them. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:33, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
• Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:19, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Keep per Dunot D. Leet Jq talk 💬 contributions 18:40, 28 April 2026 (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. --BDD (talk) 00:41, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Francisco D'Agostino → Francesco D'Agostino  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Francesco D'Agostino and Francisco D'Agostino are two different people (Q3749852 and Q139006223, respectively). NoonIcarus (talk) 21:52, 27 April 2026 (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 retarget to Big Splash. --BDD (talk) 00:39, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Big splashBig splash → Giant-impact hypothesis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no such term. Google searches find water parks. Only one source on the top of Google scholar uses "big splash" for the redirect target and that article not about "giant-impact hypothesis: Smit, J. (1997). The big splash. Nature, 390(6658), 340-341. That article makes no explanation of the term. It's not a thing outside of wikipedia AFAICT Johnjbarton (talk) 20:13, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Comment: I think this is an implausible typo for "big splat", which is mentioned on the page (it's the name of a book that is cited). Dingolover6969 (talk) 21:19, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. Refers to water parks and is a common phrase referring to a splash (fluid mechanics) that is large and used idiomatically, as in, her new single made a big splash. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:05, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per the above--cyclopia^speak! 10:45, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to the disambig at Big Splash. Searching in all lowercase is common, even if all the encyclopaedic topics are capitalised. Thryduulf (talk) 12:44, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

  Is the search case sensitive enough to make that necessary, or will searching "big splash" find the right thing even without it? If a retargeted redirect really would help people to find the right thing then I support it but I'd be surprised, and a little disappointed in the way the search works, if it did. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:31, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

  Case sensitivity depends on what method you use. If you use the internal search engine, it will take you to the case you entered if that exists or to a different capitalisation if it doesn't. If you use direct URL entry (and people do) it is fully case sensitive. There are multiple other methods of finding Wikipedia content, some of them are case sensitive, some are not. Thryduulf (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete as ambiguous with no clear target to prefer. This could also refer to Professional wrestling strikes § Big splash, though this could easily refer to a big splash (fluid mechanics). Mathguy2718 (talk) 14:13, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

  @Mathguy2718 then add them to the existing disambiguation page at Big Splash and target this there. "Ambiguous with no clear target" is rarely a reason to delete, rather it's a reason to disambiguate. Thryduulf (talk) 10:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget to Big Splash per Thryduulf. Immediately after this edit I will be adding the entries Mathguy mentioned to the disambig page. Tessaract2 (hello) 02:26, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

  They're already there, I can't read words. Tessaract2 (hello) 02:26, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget to the disambiguation page Big Splash. This version with one lower case amounts to an alternative spelling. Retarget will solve the problem that caused the nomination. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
• retarget per Thryduulf. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 22:04, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
• Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
  Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:45, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to the existing matching disamb. Respublik (talk) 13:45, 28 April 2026 (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. It looks like this is a may be a good article creation project if someone is interested. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:34, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

• Jelly wrestling → Wrestling  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Jello wrestling → Wrestling  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Jell-O wrestling → Wrestling  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

to my... uh... surprise(?), those are actually plausible terms, if a little vague. results imply they're valid terms for mud wrestling, wrestling done by what the combat sport communities would refer to as "tomato cans" and everyone else would refer to as "wimps", wresting done in any gelatinous stuff, and wrestling done specifically in jell-o. there also seems to be some notability for what i'll assume is just two of those, but it's hard to tell which, so i'll suggest returning to red and dump what i've found here if needed consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:01, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget all to mud wrestling. This is a thing, albeit a silly one. A little coverage of it could be added to mud wrestling which is only a stub and could do with general expansion. Even silly topics deserve due coverage. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:27, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

  i was actually planning on taking that article to afd for tnt, since i've found a lot of sources, all about stuff not covered in it beyond what's immediately observable from the title, and it's only actually got 4 lines about one match worth of reliable coverage. as is, i'll also procedurally oppose this retarget as surprising considering the other results, and that i didn't enough related to mud wrestling specifically to warrant this being the target consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:05, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all. These are not synonymous with wrestling generally nor with mud wrestling. They might be considered a subtype or related form to mud wrestling but the article does not discuss this. Jelly wrestling has trivial, poorly written, unsourced history that can safely be deleted. The edit summaries state that this was merged to Mud wrestling in 2005 but in comparing the versions what is written is actually saying something different. I don't think this counts as a merge. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Question: Might it be something akin to Wet and messy fetishism? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  regardless of whether or not it is, that's not really mentioned there, so it wouldn't make for a good target consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:23, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per Myceteae. Jay 💬 19:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per Myceteae. Steel1943 (talk) 03:38, 6 May 2026 (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. --BDD (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Lolbertarian → Libertarianism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Lolbertarians → Libertarianism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect of dubious importance, with no page linking to it. SomeRailfan (talk) 13:01, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Speedy keep as this is a well-documented R from non-neutral name + R from plural, with it even having its own entry on Wiktionary, therefore making it a plausible search term. It having no incoming links is irrelevant as a redirect is not required to have any in the first place, especially non-neutral ones. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 21:00, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per User:Bis-Serjetà?'s rationale. Dingolover6969 (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete or redirect to Wiktionary unless mentioned. Redirects from non-neutral terms are allowed, but there's no benefit to the reader if we don't explain the term, and a potential harm in that we appear to endorse the pejorative without explaining it. If a mention is added to Libertarianism § Criticism (which probably should be split off to its own article), then it would be fine to keep. Otherwise this should be deleted or redirected to the Wiktionary entry. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 22:30, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Noting I've merged two nominations in which all comments (other than my own, and for minor differences in timestamp) were identical. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 22:36, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per Tamzin. Without being mentioned specifically, this is unclear and doesn't benefit the reader. Additionally, per WP:SOFTSP, soft redirect should only be a solution if a topic has been commonly wikified. If after being deleted, this comes up again, then I could see a soft redirect being worth considering. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 17:14, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:REDIRECTPURPOSE. --PoliticalPoint (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2026 (UTC) — PoliticalPoint (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sockpuppet of Justthefacts (talk · contribs). consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:43, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

• Delete: this is a clear violation of WP:NPOV. As @Tamzin stated this seems like we endorse the pejorative, especially without explaining it. I don't see any RS's which refer to libertarians as lolbertarians in a blanket or serious fashion. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2026 (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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 22:02, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

• Template:Cremallera de Montserrat → Template:Railways of Montserrat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I propose deleting the redirect. All links have been changed to the new RDT name. SomeRailfan (talk) 20:44, 27 April 2026 (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. --BDD (talk) 00:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

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

that's not what that word means!? its actual meaning is vague, though, torn between an obscure ai slop twitch streamer, an italian surname, the wiktionary definition, and an italian city, none of which seem to be notable enough for a dab consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:11, 27 April 2026 (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 restore and sent to AfD. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

• List of actors who have played Narnia characters → Adaptations of The Chronicles of Narnia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Does not meet WP:NLIST. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:54, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. This isn't AfD: notability is irrelevant. J947 ‡ ^edits 10:02, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
• Send to AFD. Yeah, it's definitely an inappropriate redirect, but it was a BLAR, and there's substantial history, so the best course is probably to undo the BLAR and nominate for deletion (it appears to be WP:PROD-eligible as well). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 12:47, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
• for once, there actually are a lot of sources to maybe justify taking this to afd (in which case it should be done speedily), but i'm actually a little torn on how usable they are. of the ones i could get to load, mentions of their roles in narnia-related stuff were all in passing, and for each source, it's got like 12 unsourced credits, so i'll suggest deleting here per nom, and would also go with deletion in afd consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:17, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
• Restore without prejudice to AfD per Deacon Vorbis. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

  again, i should note that if that's done, it's best done speedily as a wrong venue close. otherwise, it's best to just evaluate the pre-blar content here, in which case it doesn't seem too controversial to determine that it was not good consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 20:02, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

  The RfD still has to determine whether this is a bad redirect. Otherwise, the article might plausibly be restored, go to AfD, and the AfD might resolve as redirect. J947 ‡ ^edits 20:31, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

  if that's a factor, i'll just go ahead and say that yeah, it's a bad redirect as there's no such list in the target, and my opinion on the pre-blar content remains. i'm just not necessarily against restoration this time because there were a lot of sources that weren't all obviously immediately garbaggio (even if i haven't been able to see any actually usable ones) consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 00:22, 29 April 2026 (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. Created both redirects mentioned by Tamzin, and tagged all of them as avoided double redirects of EXpanded MultiPlayer. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:31, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

• UT:XMPUT:XMP → Unreal II: The Awakening#eXpanded MultiPlayer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term thejiujiangdragon talk 01:20, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep and create UT XMPUT XMP and UTXMPUTXMP, the former of which is mentioned at the target article. The lack of a literatim mention with the colon is fine given that there is indeed a colon at that point in the full name, and there is evidence of that spelling being used . Tag all three and Unreal Tournament: Expanded MultiplayerUnreal Tournament: Expanded Multiplayer as {{avoided double redirect}}s of eXpanded MultiPlayereXpanded MultiPlayer, which was once an article before being merged to the current target. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:20, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ ^edits 04:30, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per Tamzin. Another example of it being used in the wild . Skynxnex (talk) 14:19, 27 April 2026 (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. Jay 💬 05:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

• Jeles emile pean → Jules-Émile Péan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo, only attested on howtopronounce.com. Delete. Duckmather (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

• Was created at this title, perhaps due to some machine-translation issue, but only stayed there for an hour, 18 years ago. Delete. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 01:47, 2 May 2026 (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 retarget to Carbon sequestration#Geological carbon sequestration. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:36, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

• Geologic sequestration of CO2Geologic sequestration of CO2 → Carbon capture and storage#Geological storage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Geologic sequestration of carbon dioxideGeologic sequestration of carbon dioxide → Carbon sequestration#Geological sequestration  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Geological sequestration of carbon dioxideGeological sequestration of carbon dioxide → Carbon sink#Geological sequestration  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should have a consistent target instead of pointing to three different places. In addition, every section is broken. Also note Geosequestration → Carbon sink. Mathguy2718 (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Carbon sequestration § Geological carbon sequestration. The section at Carbon sink is just a link to there anyway. Carbon capture and storage has mentions throughout but no dedicated section on the topic. It would make more sense to just add a link from Carbon capture and storage to the relevant section at Carbon sequestration. Geosequestration should be retargetted to the same section. It may be worth making one of these the main redirect (I'd suggest Geological sequestration of carbon dioxide) and tagging the rest as {{avoided double redirect}} so they continue to share a target in future. – Scyrme (talk) 12:25, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:50, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget per Scyrme. ⇌ Synpath 15:12, 28 April 2026 (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).