Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 June 4

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 💬 03:56, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Cheetah Woods → Tiger Woods  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unmentioned redirect at the target and anywhere on wikipedia. Does not seem to help the reader. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 16:33, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. मल्ल (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. This is almost certainly a bad joke in the wrong place, given that it's creation was contemporary with Tiger Woods#Infidelity scandal and fallout. Thryduulf (talk) 20:10, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:22, 5 June 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 💬 04:11, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• The Barney Bunch → Anti-Barney humor  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No coverage of the redirect's topic in the target article, and similarly-titled article "Barney Bunch" is currently salted. ZeroJaguar (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. There have been multiple attempts to create an article at this title, the only one of which that hasn't been revision deleted would be speediable under A7 if restored so we don't need to worry about that. There was a section at the target, but that was removed by Inhighspeed in 2021 with the summary "Vulgar, homophobic, lacking in notoriety, and probably self-promoting.") and that seems to have stuck. The last disruption related to this redirect was in 2012 so salting seems unnecessary. Thryduulf (talk) 20:21, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: while not necessarily a reason to keep given Thryduulf's comment in particular, the nominator has since been blocked as a sock. (No formal opinion.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:37, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

  The aforementioned block has since been lifted. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:22, 8 June 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 💬 04:14, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Kamisato (Genshin Impact) → List of Genshin Impact characters#Inazuma  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Tagging per WP:RFD#DELETE criterion 2 -- there are multiple characters in Genshin Impact named Kamisato (Ayaka and Ayato; brother and sister), and in nearly all sources they are either referred to by their given names. This redirect could cause confusion as to which Kamisato sibling it refers to. Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 16:18, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Noting here that the creator of the redirect has been blocked from project namespace for disruptive redirects, so I doubt we will get a response from them. (thread) Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 16:57, 4 June 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 💬 04:17, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Alert of death → Fork bomb#Alert of death  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target and I couldn't find it mentioned in another article. Suonii180 (talk) 10:09, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Content was added to the article by the redirect's creator at about the time the redirect was created and removed without summary by an IP editor a week later. As this was in 2011 and (afaict) it hasn't been re-added it's safe to say the removal stuck. It doesn't seem to be an established term for that either, "alert of death" -Wikipedia gets fewer than 20 hits on google, only 2 of which are in a computing context and neither have this meaning. Thryduulf (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

  The content is also wrong. Since JavaScript code is synchronous unless it uses async features the removed code isn't a fork bomb. * Pppery * _{in solidarity} 16:44, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 5 June 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 💬 04:28, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

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

I'm not entirely sure why this name was redirected to Hexamastix coercens - Hexamastix is a genus with 18 accepted species according to AlgaeBase, so H. coercens is neither the sole or even the type species (which is H. batrachorum). This redirect should either be expanded into an article on the genus or deleted to allow for an article to be created at a later date. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 08:26, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I created the redirect because Hexamastix had over 40 incoming article links and Hexamastix coercens had been tagged as an orphan article for over 10 years. It seemed like a way to point readers at least to a related article rather than nothing, and possibly help everybody out. To me, a redirect is even easier to turn into an article than a redlink, it definitely wasn't my intention to slow the creation of an article at Hexamastix. I didn't realize this wasn't a good practice so I won't do it anymore. --Here2rewrite (talk) 12:34, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey, no worries, thank you for explaining you reasoning - I apologise if my nomination sounded harsh! Redirects from genus to species are extremely uncommon on enwiki (though I believe they are common practice on some other language wikis for monotypic genera) so I was very surprised when I came across this one, but I absolutely see where you were coming from. I personally prefer redlinks to redirects, and I think this is a fairly common opinion here on enwiki, but I will notify WP:PROTIST of this discussion and encourage any interested user to expand this into an article, as this would obviously be preferable to either deletion or leaving this redirect in place. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 03:28, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Done, see discussion at WikiProject Protista. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 03:45, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Nope your words didn't strike me as harsh at all, I'm clearly not an expert on this subject so I don't mind deferring. I don't object to the deletion of the redirect if no article gets written. Here2rewrite (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Plantdrew (talk) 15:37, 12 June 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. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:35, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

• Athletics at the 2026 Asian Games → 2026 Asian Games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 3x3 basketball at the 2026 Asian Games → 2026 Asian Games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kabaddi at the 2026 Asian Games – Women's tournament → Kabaddi at the 2026 Asian Games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kabaddi at the 2026 Asian Games – Men's tournament → Kabaddi at the 2026 Asian Games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Too early for this, can be created closer to the games when more information is available. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:01, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: Bundled four identical nominations made by the same editor. CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:33, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, I am bad at usernames (talk · contribs) 08:01, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep the Kabbadi redirects as they point to an existing article about the sport at the upcoming games. Delete the other two as the current target contains little information on specific sports. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:23, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

  It appears that the nom has draftified the Kabbadi article, so I am okay with deleting all now as a result. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:53, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all per nom. Jay 💬 12:55, 14 June 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 Wikipedia:Wiki Workers United solidarity and removed the hatnote added by the nom. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:36, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:SolidarityWikipedia:Solidarity → Wikipedia:WikiProject Anarchism/Participate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This currently redirects to WikiProject Anarchism; should the target be changed to the petition where WP:SOLIDARITY links, at least temporarily? BlaqWiedow (talk) 04:39, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I should note that I added a hatnote to the top of the petition page, feel free to revert if that is not necessary. BlaqWiedow (talk) 04:43, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to suggested. No need to have inconsistency in capitalization. --ABx11 (she/they | formerly TheAuroraBorealis | In solidarity) 05:04, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Gosh. This redirect is ancient. It originally must have pointed at a WikiProject Anarchism essay (it was titled something like "solidarity among rogues", if I recall correctly) that's long since gone. Retarget, and no need for the hatnote. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 05:45, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

  Wow, that mini-essay is a hell of a time-capsule of 2000s Wikipedia. --Grnrchst (talk) 14:59, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget per above. No need for a hat note. This redirect is obviously way outdated. --Grnrchst (talk) 15:00, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:47, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget: I do have a COI here as I am the creator of the all-caps redirect, but if the essay this redirect initially pointed to really is a decade-since gone, then I support retargeting. - BlueEleephant (talk · contribs) 23:28, 6 June 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 CNN#CNN Underscored. A mention has been added, so the delete !votes have lost their weight. Only one editor argued for refinement, but it wasn't opposed and it's compatible with the keep !votes. Let's call it a "soft retarget". If there is any disagreement about where exactly this should point to within the target article, I suggest that be discussed at Talk:CNN. (non-admin closure) Chess enjoyer (talk) 21:30, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• CNN UnderscoredCNN Underscored → CNN  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unmentioned and potentially misleading redirect. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:45, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom and previous discussion to delete, which had the same target. When this redirect was created, no mention was added, so I believe this redirect meets WP:G4. Mathguy2718 (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep as creator – This redirect is for the |publisher= field in citations that cite CNN Underscored. CNN Underscored is the review division of CNN, analogous to The Athletic vis-à-vis The New York Times, io9 vis-à-vis Gizmodo, or Vulture vis-à-vis New York magazine. Redirects are WP:CHEAP, so there is no benefit to having to pipe the link in every citation template as |publisher=[[CNN|CNN Underscored]]. Of course, I am not opposed to adding some information about CNN Underscored to our main article for CNN, but the lack thereof alone should not be grounds for deletion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:07, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a prominently featured category of (rather spammy appearing) content on CNN, which is a major source of information for millions of people (or more than millions). I don't see a good reason to delete it. I also see nothing misleading about it. Are these supposed to be objective reviews or are they just ads? Either way, it's a well-established category of something published by CNN. (By the way, I think that should be used in the |work= parameter, not the |publisher= parameter.) Probably the CNN article should mention it explicitly, because their website promotes a lot of things in that category. They seem to say they use their own judgment about which products they choose to promote, but provide links to where the recommended products can be purchased, and they collect revenue from the sellers when people use those links. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:27, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

  I just added a couple of sentences about it into the CNN article. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:51, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for doing that. And yeah, technically, the citation syntax should be |website=[[CNN Underscored]] |publisher=[[CNN]]. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the added mention?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:00, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Refine to CNN#Other digital offerings or to the visible anchor I have added at CNN#CNN Underscored. The redirect should absolutely be supported by a suitable mention at the target. Wikilinking in citations isn't particularly helpful if the target doesn't actually describe the source, so this is contingent on the content remaining in the article. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 17:20, 9 June 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 💬 04:19, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Aviturus → Giant salamander  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ulanurus → Giant salamander  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Zaissanurus → Giant salamander  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete per reason 10 (...could plausibly be expanded into an article...). The target page does not discuss the redirects beyond simple mentions. Per WP:NSPECIES, all species (and the genera containing them) are considered notable. It is certainly not common practice to redirect genus/species to their parent taxa, as this discourages their creation and/or elaboration (WP:RED; there is currently no indication that the page in question needs to be created). -SlvrHwk (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Plantdrew (talk) 04:19, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: I'm not against deletion, @SlvrHwk, but I have to point out that WP:NSPECIES doesn't cover fossil taxa. Chess enjoyer (talk) 07:06, 4 June 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).