Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 9

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 9, 2026.

Zhang Weiyin

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 23#Zhang Weiyin

28 February 2026

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 Portal:Current events/2026 February 28. Per WP:SNOW. The others were never bundled, so I will retarget them separately. (non-admin closure) I2Overcome talk 09:28, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

2026-02-28 was CSD under R3. I think this and the other related redirects need to be changed to current events portal. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 20:08, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

For reference, these are the other ones: 2.28.2026, 2.28.26, 28/2/2026, 28/02/2026, 02/28/2026, 2/28/2026, February 28, 2026. They also need to be included in the RFD as well. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 20:14, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete all. The current events portal no longer covers this date so redirecting there isn't appropriate. This seems like another attempt to make an equivalence between the assassination of Khamenei and 9/11 (which has redirects like 11 September 2001). The assassination isn't referred to by just its date, so this isn't comparable. We already snow closed a discussion of similar redirects at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 1#2/28 and its kind. – Scyrme (talk) 20:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2026 February 28. Wasn't aware the portal kept old versions earlier. Retargetting there seems reasonable. – Scyrme (talk) 20:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2026 February 28. I agree with others, the death of Khomeini isn't even the most important event of that day, if anything it would be the start of the 2026 Iran war. TruεRατιο (talk) 17:08, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Portal:Current events/2026 February 28. --Srleffler (talk) 04:39, 12 March 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).

Sweet sandwich time

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 List of 2020s Super Bowl commercials#2026 (LX). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 17:05, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Seems to be a recent Hellman's marketing campaign, but it's not mentioned at the article at all, and has incorrect capitalisation. I do not think this redirect is needed. Strugglehouse (talk) 16:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to List of 2020s Super Bowl commercials § 2026 (LX) as {{r to list entry}}. Wikipedia has information about this topic, so there's no reason not to help readers find it. Tried the search engine for this title (without any quotes which would force it to look for this exact phrase), and the results were for irrelevant articles, so a reader is unlikely to find the intended target without a redirect. – Scyrme (talk) 17:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Sure, I'm happy with that. Strugglehouse (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • retarget per Scyrme --Lenticel (talk) 03:13, 13 March 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).

Liz (musician)

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 Liz (disambiguation)#People. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 17:03, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

There are multiple musicians listed in Liz, with the current target and Liz (South Korean singer) both commonly referred to as just "Liz". मल्ल (talk) 16:02, 9 March 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).

Sparra

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:31, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

vague, almost hopelessly so. the closest this term seems to have of a primary topic is somewhat suggestive furry art

...except this isn't where it ends, as there's some pre-blar content here, that suggests that this was a somewhat obscure type of irish battle axe. that axe isn't currently mentioned, and of the two sources in that stub (which seems to have been an attempt at an article about obscure ancient irish battle axes in general?), i could only get one to load, and mentions of the sparra seem to be passing in it

i don't really know if the source is useful for this. if it is, i don't know if the target would be the proper place for a mention, and i've found no other stuff about it, so maybe return to red? consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 17:54, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

  • eh, delete as a foreign redirect, there doesn't really to seem to be the affinity there to justify having this. even wiktionary doesn't list sparra as an irish term meaning battle-axe (though sparth/sparthe is listed as a middle english term meaning battle-axe) also uh, what kind of furry art? asking for a friend, or maybe to judge whether or the art meets general notability guidelines and is worthy of an article caesar (it/he) (talky place) (united bestowals) 18:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
    bird consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 18:22, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
    I can see the logic in that, as "Sparra" is a plausible spelling pronunciation of "Sparrow" in some English accents, but this is not a justification to retarget to Sparrow. Thryduulf (talk) 18:43, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, second choice disambig. For me the primary topic in searches is clearly "Scottish patients at risk of readmission", which might be notable (certainly enough for a mention on a broader article, maybe for a standalone one) but which we don't have content about, followed by the "Symptoms in Persons at Risk of Rheumatoid Arthritis" questionnaire that again we have no content about but where the acronym should be mentioned if we did. On Wikipedia, I found a bunch of uses, none of which I'm certain are sufficient for a dabmention - Ayquelinus Guillelmi de Sparra (mentioned at Archdeacon of Bournemouth#Late medieval, DJ Sparra (mentioned at Popular music of Birmingham#Hip hop and Dance music), multiple characters at Redwall (TV series), and Ivan "Sparra" Romcek (mentioned in the prose and table at Milperra massacre#Battle) being the best contenders. Thryduulf (talk) 18:56, 27 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-BLAR page content?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:11, 9 March 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).

Access 1 disorder

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 22#Access 1 disorder

Big DT

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) 21:42, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

This page was originally created as a fan page for Donald Trump, but I opted to create a redirect instead. However, a Google search for "Big DT" brings up Desmond Watson instead, though this name isn't mentioned on Watson's article. I'm happy to delete or change target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 13:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Watson's nickname is Big Dez, also, according to this website (don't know how reliable it is) "Tush Push Terminator". I've never heard or seen Donald Trump referred to as "Big DT". Judging by Bob4230's user contributions, the creation of the Big DT page, with its only source the Donald Trump page, was trolling/vandalism. I recommend deleting the redirect page. Space4TCatHerder🖖 14:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Most results in a web search refer to various large American football defensive tackles, and not to a specific person. - Eureka Lott 22:47, 12 March 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).

Nat Geo &YO

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) 21:42, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Another "Nat Geo" redirect created by TimTims2022. I originally tagged it on 15 February, but I didn't add it to the now-closed multi-pronged nomination, so I've fixed the date to align with this nomination. Pinged Mathguy2718 who participated in that nomination to weigh in on this! Intrisit (talk) 12:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete. Unsure what "&YO" is supposed to mean, and searching for this exact string gave nothing related to Nat Geo. This is most likely a punctuation error, but even then, there is no information on "YO". Mathguy2718 (talk) 14:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Mathguy2718: "&YO" is a stylised version of "& I", where "yo" is a Spanish pronoun. It was a channel under the National Geographic brand that operated in Latin America. (see eg. ) If there's no information on Wikipedia, this might be a case of WP:RETURNTORED, but the title isn't made up or an error. – Scyrme (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    Even then, the cases shown in the video are "Nat Geo & Yo" in the title and "NAT GEO & YO" in the logo. The logo could be misinterpreted as "NAT GEO &YO" but not "Nat Geo &YO". Anyway, this video isn't a reliable source and does not explain how what the actual TV channel is. Mathguy2718 (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    The video is isn't intended to be RS for anything or to explain what the TV channel was; I was not proposing to use it as a reference to add it to the target article. It's just a demonstration that the channel existed, and that I'm not guessing or making this up. My point is literally just to say what this title is intended to refer to, nothing more, as you had no idea. – Scyrme (talk) 23:58, 9 March 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).

No-kernel

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. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:55, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Does not seem to be described at the target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

  • delete, pre-blar content shows that this was copied from a page relating to the 'tunes os/language project' that used the term 'kernel' in a specific way to mean 'the central authority in an operating system', and they used a decentralised kernel, which they considered to be equivalent to having 'no kernel'. to me it sounds more akin to an exokernel design. of course, 'no kernel' is not a standard term, unless you want it to refer to the very old computers that lacked operating systems as they were directly programmed instead caesar (it/he) (talky place) (united bestowals) 15:19, 9 March 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).

God's Beads

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 16#God's Beads

Bloodwort (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 Keep * Pppery * it has begun... 20:52, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

First time I've ever seen this... I don't think we need spelling variant redirects for disambiguation pages? Both Bloodwart and Bloodwort already redirect to Bloodwart (disambiguation). This seems superfluous. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:43, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Bloodwart redirects to Sanguinaria currently. However, I would support a moving of Bloodwart (disambiguation) to Bloodwart though that is a different discussion. PokémonPerson 15:56, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Huh... so it does. Okay as primary topic. But I don't understand what you mean by moving of Bloodwart (disambiguation) to Bloodwart - that means giving the article the title of the (unneeded) disambiguation? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
I think they mean that since there's no article located at Bloodwart (the article is located at Sanguinaria not Bloodwart), there's no need for the disambiguation page to have "(disambiguation)" in its title; it can just be located where the redirect presently is. Practically, this would mean a technical move to swap the titles of Bloodwart and Bloodwart (disambiguation), so the latter becomes a redirect to Bloodwart (which would be the disambiguation page). The redirect with "(disambiguation)" in its name could be kept in case intentional links to the disambiguation page are needed. – Scyrme (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep as {{avoided double redirect}} for Bloodwort - Bloodwort (disambiguation) could, in principle, be used where a link to Bloodwort is intentional in a context where "bloodwort" rather than "bloodwart" is the spelling used by an article. If only Bloodwart (disambiguation) existed, the only way to make an intentional link to the disambiguation page would be to use "wart" even though elsewhere the article refers to "wort". Though we could get around this problem by piping the link to make it look like Bloodwort (disambiguation), it seems harmless to keep it so piping isn't needed. – Scyrme (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep bloodwart is the misspelling; bloodwort (disambiguation) was recently moved with the edit summary "correcting typo", and bloodwort was moved by the same editor without an edit summary. I can see somebody not familiar with list of wort plants thinking that wort is a misspelling, but it isn't. I don't think Sanguinaria is the primary topic of bloodwort; that plant is usually known as bloodroot. Haemodoraceae is definitely known as the bloodwort family. At a minimum, move back to bloodwort (disambiguation), delete bloodwart (disambiguation), keep bloodwart as a plausible misspelling and retarget to bloodwort (disambiguation). But also consider moveing bloodwart (disambiguation) to bloodwort. Plantdrew (talk) 15:47, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Comment as mover: I've found sources that use the spelling "bloodwart" (e.g. )- Bloodwort would be a useful redirect as the -wort ending is common in plants as seen by List of wort plants, but the -wart ending seems to be used more specifically for bloodwart. PokémonPerson 15:58, 10 March 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).

Sammarinese Ambassador to the United States

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to San Marino–United States relations. Rusalkii (talk) 21:44, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Redirect to one individual who previously served as ambassador but is primarily notable for other reasons. Unclear that readers searching this term would expect to be directed to this biography. AusLondonder (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Comment - Given he's not had that title for a decade, I agree that it should not redirect to his biography. The best plausible targets I could find were San Marino–United States relations, which briefly mentions that Paolo Rondelli served as San Marino's first ambassador to the US, and List of ambassadors to the United States, which lists the most recent ambassador to the US (though searching online, I suspect this is out of date; Damiano Beleffi now appears to serve as a permanent representative to the UN, though perhaps he maintains both roles, idk). Of these two I lean towards targeting San Marino–United States relations as it's more specific and informative, but neither is great. This may be a case of WP:RETURNTORED. – Scyrme (talk) 14:10, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak retarget. I agree with Scryme. FWIW Damiano Beleffi does appear to have two hats ("United States" tab) and ("Mission in New York" tab). Thryduulf (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:02, 9 March 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).

Ico (playstation)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 16#Ico (playstation)

Cuban language

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 Demographics of Cuba#Language. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Is Cuban Spanish the best target? The current target does show this is the main language of Cuba. However, it does not link to Languages of Cuba, which redirects to Demographics of Cuba#Language. The only mentions of "Cuban language" are for Cuban Language Academy and in Music of Cuba. At the same time, no language spoken in Cuba is directly called "Cuban language", but there is Cuban Spanish and Cuban Sign Language. Mathguy2718 (talk) 06:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Demographics_of_Cuba#Language as {{R avoided double redirect}}, since it mentions the other languages spoken in Cuba and already has a hatnote to both Cuban Spanish and Cuba language, which is another possible (but less likely) desired target. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 23:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep (1st choice) and add a hatnote to Demographics_of_Cuba#Language and possibly Cuba language. Spanish is the official and predominant language of Cuba. A cursory Google search for "Cuban language" exclusively reveals hits referring to Cuban Spanish on the first page. Google Scholar results are more mixed but largely reference Cuban Spanish; references to non-Spanish languages are often qualified, e.g. Afro-Cuban language. Weak retarget to Demographics_of_Cuba#Language as distant second choice—in other words, don't let me stand in the way if consensus otherwise goes that direction but Cuban Spanish appears to be the primary topic for Cuban language and is my preferred target. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:19, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Demographics_of_Cuba#Language. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 17:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:57, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget per Kepler-1229b. KarelOrHarken555 (talk) 08:35, 13 March 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).

Yguazú

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 Iguaçu * Pppery * it has begun... 20:50, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Iguaçu, hatnote, or disambiguate itself? Abesca (talk) 02:48, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

gn:Yguasu is a dab. Abesca (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Dabify at Yguazú for Colonia Yguazú, Yguazú District, and Yguazú River NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Iguaçu, and add these articles to that list. I think this falls within WP:DABCOMBINE. In this context, "y" is pronounced identically to "i" in Spanish, so someone could plausibly confuse the spellings if they don't know the Paraguayan version is spelled with "y", more closely following the Guarani y guasú. Iguaçu already combines Iguazu; it's not a huge leap from there to Yguazu or Yguasu. – Scyrme (talk) 17:57, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
I previously said to dabify on its own, but after re-evaluating, equally okay with retargeting with the articles added. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 14:24, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget all to Iguaçu, add Yguazú as one of the bolded variants in the lead, and add these three articles to the dab page. These are all variants of the same name. These are highly ambiguous and prone to confusion even when one spelling is used deliberately. Combining these on a single dab page makes sense given the ambiguity but also because the names are related. While this is a perfectly appropriate dab page, it also serves as somewhat of a set index article by listing all of the related entries that share the same/similar name. Cataloguing all of these on a single page best serves our readers. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 14:56, 18 March 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).

LENS

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 16#LENS

Super Pro Fighter Q

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 23#Super Pro Fighter Q

サンズ

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 23#サンズ

Chicago station

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 23#Chicago station

Nazzi

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 16#Nazzi

Obsolete 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 Keep * Pppery * it has begun... 20:48, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

DELETE. "Obsolete word" is just a common noun phrase. It shouldn't be in an encylopedia. It also shouldn't redirect to an article about a distinct topic (Archaism), as this is obviously misleading.

On a sidenote, the Archaism article shouldn't give a dictionary definition of the word "obsolete": "an obsolete word or sense is one that is no longer used at all." No shit. you could replace "word or sense" with anything and it would be true, because that is the definition of the word obsolete. Really; use your imagination. Wh1pla5h99 (talk) 03:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

I have no objection to the proposal here. My only comment to leave here is to explain why anyone felt compelled to explain what "obsolete" means regarding usage specifically (as opposed to other senses of that word). There is a specific reason why that desire for clarification arises. People assume various interpretations of the label "obsolete", regarding word choice and usage, that coexist and compete with or contradict one another. Wiktionary tries to reserve "obsolete" to the sense that "not only is that word, or that specific sense thereof, no longer used, but also, many readers might have a hard time even guessing the intended meaning", which makes it different from both (1) "archaic", which refers to a word whose intended sense in the given occurrence is obvious to most readers (i.e., fluent speakers who aren't stupid or ignorant) but whose use for that meaning feels noticeably antiquated, and (2) "historical", which many people assume "obsolete" refers to. Again, this is only to explain why the explanatory effort wasn't stupid; I have no objection to the proposal here, because I currently don't give much of a shit about how or whether Wikipedia tries (or fails to try) to help its users with this usage quibble. Wikipedia and Wiktionary are both currently merely assclownery anyway, really, compared to what they ought to be by now, because almost nobody on Earth (not even the minority who are competent to try) truly gives a fuck about being arsed to fix them lol. Quercus solaris (talk) 03:31, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep. This is a simple redirect from a quick two-word definition of "Archaism" towards the actual article for "Archaism", meant for those who don't know what the actual name for the concept is but still want to read an encyclopedia article on it. As for the idea that the Archaism article should be rewritten... That's not for this forum to worry about. Bring your concerns to Talk:Archaism... or be bold and find a way to fix it yourself. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
No its not. These mean very different things. Your misunderstanding of that illustrates the problem. Wh1pla5h99 (talk) 03:55, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
...Sorry, got distracted by the actual arguments you made in the OP post-- "noun phrase that shouldn't be in an encyclopedia, and shouldn't be redirected towards any topic" and "Archaism needs to be rewritten"-- and didn't think to check the actual meaning here, which is something you never argued against in your original post. You're right in that, as the Archaism article states, a distinction exists between archaisms and obsolete words; however I'm not sure a good alternate target exists.
Still weakly keep, as the article does briefly talk about obsolete words in the second paragraph (as a comparison between that concept and archaisms); however, if a better target is found please take the reader there instead. Worst case scenario we can delete as per WP:RETURNTORED; while I am roundly unconvinced by the idea that a "noun phrase" like this "doesn't belong on an encyclopedia" given we have actual articles with much longer and more elaborate titles, the idea that we don't have a suitable target to go to is much more concerning. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with being long and elaborate. It would be like having a Wikipedia entry for "red shirt", that redirected you to a page that said "a red shirt is a piece of clothing worn on the upper body that is red in colour". The entire meaning is contained in the word definitions, and Wikipedia is WP:NOTDICTIONARY, its an encyclopedia. Wh1pla5h99 (talk) 18:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
red shirt exists, though-- it's a redirect to the Redshirt DAB, which includes, among other things, a link to Redshirt (stock character), a noted trope regarding stock characters killed off early for little reason. Which tells me the problem was never with the redirect itself, "noun phrases" like that are fine-- it was with the target being a WP:DICDEF.
And I repeat what I said in response to that-- if you feel the page redirected to shouldn't have a WP:DICDEF of "Obsolete word", the response is to try and get the DICDEF removed first-- not to remove the redirect first. And the correct venue to do so, if you're not interested in simply being WP:BOLD and rewriting the article yourself, is Talk:Archaism. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep and tag with {{R to related topic}} (maybe with {{R with possibilities}}? although probably these two should stay together). Even if the content of archaism is refined, keeping some discussion of the distinction between an archaic word and an obsolete word makes sense. Skynxnex (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
    But is it not misleading to redirect to a word that means something different. Most people clicking or hovering on it will only read the first paragraph, and assume that an obsolete word is an archaism. Wh1pla5h99 (talk) 17:49, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. The concept of obsolete words and the relationship to archaisms is described in the lead. The brief description is encyclopedic—not merely a dictionary definition of obsolete word—and likely helpful to readers interested in the concept. I don't see how this is misleading since the term is clearly defined and distinguished from archaism. We do know that readers often skim the lead or don't get past the opening sentence or two. There are several approaches to address that concern. The lead could be reorganized to define obsolete word early in the opening sentence; an anchor could be placed at the beginning of the second paragraph and the redirect could be targeted (refined) there; obsolete words could be given their own brief section and the redirect could be refined there. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:42, 18 March 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).

Y2K7

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 16#Y2K7

9:41 AM

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) 21:47, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I find it extremely unlikely that anyone will be searching for "9:41 AM" on Wikipedia. Further, it is implausible that anyone wanting to go to iPhone will use 9:41 AM to get there. GSK (talk • edits) 00:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

What if we add it to the target article? Can this fix it? Maybe this will fix it without the use of wiki duct tape. Maybe... - SimpleObjects-9ei (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Personally, my concern is not whether or not 9:41 AM is mentioned in iPhone. My concern, as I mentioned above, stems from the fact that it is extremely unlikely that anyone will be searching for "9:41 AM" on Wikipedia. Further, it is implausible that anyone wanting to go to iPhone will use 9:41 AM to get there. GSK (talk • edits) 00:50, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
I added something to your talk page. Go check it out. - SimpleObjects-9ei (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
I'm not usually in the business of repeating myself but I did so again on my talk page in the hopes that you read what I'm saying and understand it. I do not care if 9:41 AM has coverage in news sources. That is not my concern here. GSK (talk • edits) 01:17, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. 9:41 AM is just a time and is not exclusive to iPhones?
feedmepaperr (talk) 10:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Then @Thryduulf:, we need to DELETE this, what I would call nonsensical redirect. Absolutely no reason for it to be redirected to the history of the iPhone. This redirect is absurd and nonsensical, and needs to go. Simple as that. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 16:46, 13 March 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).

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks