Wikiwand AI

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< May 3
May 5 >

May 4

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 4, 2026.

Kashida + non-Arabic

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) 05:26, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

More pages of the type described in Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_21#Underscores_in_Arabic_names, substituting a kashida (ـ) for a hyphen, and always after a definite article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:57, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

delete all charset mismatch that's unlikely to be useful. User "Oreocooke" (speak of the sun and it shines) 08:31, 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).

Arabic diacritics + anything else

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) 05:25, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Each of these redirects contains Arabic diacritics in combination with a non-Arabic character. They are covered by "Syriac + anything else" on the title blacklist. Assuming I have checked all the diacritics, the only entry of this type which is not included is Effective. Power لُلُصّبُلُلصّبُررً ॣ ॣh ॣ ॣ 冗. See quarry:query/105042 for all page titles with Arabic + anything else, including these. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:51, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete. One or two of these, like List of Egyptiansٍ, don't even make sense. R Prazeres (talk) 00:15, 5 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).

Template:Infobox Japan station

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. Technically a 2-2 ratio including the nom, but as Thryduulf points out, this was a merge, so WP:RFD#KEEP applies. (non-admin closure) 9ninety (talk) 07:06, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

The template was moved; no pages link to it, and all now use Template:Infobox station instead. SomeRailfan (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Moved from Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Infobox Japan station Star walker (talk) 22:28, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep this was merged not moved. Thryduulf (talk) 01:45, 5 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).

Transgender Visibility Day

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 withdrawn. --BDD (talk) 13:40, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Transgender Day? Skemous (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Keep Similar terms redirect there. I'll add a hatnote for the Brazilian observance, though, the only other topic on the disambiguation page with "visibility" in the name. --BDD (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep, and I was actually thinking of TDOV when I read the redirect. Pretty common, I would say. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 00:56, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep if someone includes "visibility" in their search then it's significantly more likely than not they want the article that has that word in the title. Thryduulf (talk) 01:47, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Keep per Organhaver --VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 01:51, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Withdrawal Skemous (talk) 12:51, 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).

Bab el hadid

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 13#Bab el hadid

Lucifer Valentine

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 Vomit Gore Trilogy. wbm1058 (talk) 13:27, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Semi-procedural RfD; from 2015 to 2025 this pointed to Slaughtered Vomit Dolls. Since then various people on the talk page have requested it be retargeted variously to Kittens (band), Shawn Fedorchuk (but see Talk:Shawn Fedorchuk#Unverified attribution to the "Lucifer Valentine" identity) and Vomit Gore Trilogy. Sending this dispute to RfD since its complexity exceeds what I am capable of dealing with as an edit request responder with no interest in the subject. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Vomit Gore Trilogy. "Lucifer Valentine", on the basis of his films, has been accused (perhaps rightly) of various crimes, and Fedorchuk has been accused of being Valentine - however, there are no reliable sources to back this up, and if we say in WikiVoice, even via a redirect, that Fedorchuk is Valentine we're entering into potentially dangerous legal territory. If there's a conviction, or Fedorchuk admits to being Valentine, the situation may change, but we should not be linking the two at this point. The overall film series seems to be a more appropriate target than a single film in it. Tevildo (talk) 17:50, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
BrownBearz (talk) 16:53, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Courtesy pings: MPGuy2824, LunaEatsTuna, this topic may be of interest. Issac I Navarro (talk) 18:23, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Comment: There is also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn Fedorchuk. Issac I Navarro (talk) 18:31, 9 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).

Ubac

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 14#Ubac

산

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#산

Yugosla

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#Yugosla

Yarinca

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:53, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Not sure what this has to do with the country; ~5000 results on Google Search indicate this seems to be a female Spanish-language name. I found only 2 results also containing "Yugoslavia", including one on Spanish WP, delete per WP:RLOTE; no affinity or relevance. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 18:28, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

The Italian and Spanish versions of Optimist World Championship both give Yarinca as a place in Yugoslavia which hosted the event in 1977. Curiously, the English version instead lists Koper. The Polish version of Optimist (dinghy) includes a similar table which lists Yarinca not Koper. This is evidently a mistake, as the cited reference gives the Turkish location of Yarımca (not clear which, but plausibly Yarımca, Kocaeli which is coastal so could have hosted a regatta) for 1976 not Ankara (which seems unlikely; Ankara isn't coastal, though maybe it could have been held at Lake Mogan?), with Koper listed for 1977. I suspect a mistake was made by an editor which was subsequently copied across multiple language Wikipedia articles without being checked. The English article has Ankara for 1976 and Koper 1977, but I suspect this is due to the mistake being only partially corrected. Older revisions of the English article also shared Ankara and "Yarinca".
I'm unsure whether Yarinca should be retargeted to Yarımca as a plausible misspelling, but lean delete as disambiguation pages aren't intended for handling misspellings, and it's not clear this one is common outside Wikipedia. The mistake should be corrected across the various language versions of these articles. – Scyrme (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Found this Arkas News article which affirms that the Optimist World Championship have [sic] been held once in 1976 in Yarımca, Kocaeli and this Türkiye Sailing Federation page that likewise lists Yarımca not Ankara, so I'm more confident that Ankara is a mistake. I've amended the English article. – Scyrme (talk) 19:43, 4 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).

Josip Broz Tito's

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#Josip Broz Tito's

Joey Tito

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. Left guide (talk) 23:27, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Searched both of these on Google Search, ~7000 results for the first one, of which none I saw had to do with the Communist Tito, and second one turned up 0 results. Third one seems to be an exclusively French way of referring to Tito, with 1650 results on Google Search; seems to fail WP:RLOTE. Delete all. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 18:19, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Jay 💬 11:35, 12 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).

Draft:Golden Tempo(horse)

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. wbm1058 (talk) 03:34, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

This was a draft created in error after the article in mainspace had been created. Then it was changed to a redirect. This redirect should be deleted as nothing of long-term consequence linked to it and the title was malformed (no space before the opening paren) and would unlikely be a search term. the Stefen 𝕋ower 18:18, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Speedy delete. There's a speedy deletion criterion for this. See G6 and specifically the template {{Db-error}}. Unsure why it was removed, looking at the page history. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 00:53, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
I tried that and it got changed to a redirect. Perhaps that was seen as a natural fix, but the problem is this draft has nothing to do with the actual article's creation and thus has no rationale for one flowing into the other. At any rate, to avoid a potential conflict, I submitted it here for a resolution. the Stefen 𝕋ower 01:06, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
@Organhaver if a speedy deletion nomination is declined in good faith, then it is not eligible for speedy deletion (excluding for things like newly discovered copyright violations) regardless of whether the decline was objectively correct or not. Thryduulf (talk) 02:02, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
It was not "declined", though. The entire draft got turned into a redirect. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 02:14, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Speedy delete I agree we do not need this draft, since we have the article in mainspace. Catfurball (talk) 15:10, 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).

Vague Tito redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 14#Vague Tito redirects

CupCake

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 Hostess CupCake. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 01:16, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

As CamelCase-style redirects created in 2024, these first pointed to Hostess CupCake which is stylised as such, until they got retargeted to just Cupcake. WP:SMALLDETAILS makes me think these should be retargeted back to their original Hostess target. Otherwise delete as CamelCase redirects shouldn't be created anymore. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 18:06, 4 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).

Augustinus von Hippo

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... 01:53, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Fails WP:RLOTE; no special affinity with German. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Keep: Redirects are cheap, and this one serves a plausible purpose. One of the most important elements of Augustine's notability is his influence on philosophy, particularly German philosophy. There are more than a few German philosophical texts that make references to Augustine, and it is not wholly unlikely that a German speaker or a philosophy student may punch in this name when trying to figure out if this was a guy who was especially fat or particularly fond of megafaunal ungulates. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
    But how likely is it that a reader of German philosophy books (who 90% of the time would be a native German speaker, or at least someone who prefers communicating in German over English) would type this into English WP and not into German WP? I assume Christ has been more impactful than Augustine on German literature, yet we only have Jesus Christus as a redirect because it's from a affinitative language (in this case, Latin per its redirect categories), not because we think German speakers are typing it in to search for the article on Christ. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 22:05, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
    You could make this argument about virtually any influential philosopher. That the German-language form of his name occurs in German-language sources doesn't mean a redirect in German is warranted on the English-language Wikipedia. It is not the purpose of redirects of facilitate navigation of Wikipedia via other languages. – Scyrme (talk) 23:19, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
    I don't think that's correct. We have thousands of redirects in Category:Redirects from non-English-language terms. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:21, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep – no special affinity with German? Did you visit de:Augustinus von Hippo? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:02, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Michael Bednarek: Could you elaborate on why the German-language article is relevant for those of us who don't read German fluently. – Scyrme (talk) 23:12, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
    The German Wikipedia article is of very little relevance to our readers. However, the redirect, which has some incoming links, serves as a finding aid for German-speaking readers. Augustine influenced German theology and philosophy widely. See the collection at de:Augustinus von Hippo#Literatur and de:Portal:Philosophie/Philosophiebibliographie#Augustinus. This is further illustrated by the German Pope Benedict XVI's doctoral dissertation which had Augustine's teachings as its subject. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:26, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
    But again, how does this influence German speakers on English Wikipedia? A while back Nynazism (Swedish for "Neo-Nazism") got nominated for deletion and I successfully argued that it should have been retargeted from Neo-Nazism to Neo-Nazism in Sweden (a section in a separate article) per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Following the same logic, perhaps a reader typing in the German version of his name would expect to find text relating to his veneration in German-speaking countries, which he/she would be WP:SURPRISEd to find no information about on Augustine's main article. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 23:00, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
    Why would a reader typing in the German version of his name expect anything else but Augustine of Hippo? As I wrote above, we have thousands of redirects in Category:Redirects from non-English-language terms. This is exactly like that. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:10, 14 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep per above; used in many book titles. J947 ‡ edits 01:15, 14 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).

August O'Neil

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 14#August O'Neil

Harry Potter Real Person Fic

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 RfD has never reached any agreement on the fundamental principles behind when to restore/send to AfD and when not to do so. Hence declaring one party's view of those principles correct and the other wrong would be a supervote. For that reason I've closed many discussions as "no consensus on whether to restore or delete, default to restore". But in this specific discussion, I don't think there's any more I can say other than that Thryduulf made his case for restoring but failed to convince any of the other participants. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

There's plenty of discussion of Harry Potter at the target article, but not in the context of Real person fiction. And that article, in turn, doesn't mention Harry Potter. This was a WP:BLAR that should've been an outright deletion, notwithstanding it being 20 years ago! BDD (talk) 15:30, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete. I see no material whatsoever about Harry Potter being a real person or real people in Harry Potter stories.—Anita5192 (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
    That's not the intention and isn't how the title would be interpreted by those searching for this topic. This is about people writing real person fanfiction (RPF) involving the actors. For example, the pre-redirect article discusses fans shipping Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson. There's a large audience and community for both Harry Potter fan fiction and Real person fiction, so it's not entirely implausible that there could be a notable overlap; I honestly don't know whether or not the topic is notable. – Scyrme (talk) 16:45, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Restore and AfD. The original content was clearly an attempt at an encyclopaedia article and those external links function as sources, especially at the time, and the subject is a potentially notable intersection of two notable topics. Together there there is clearly no justification for speedy deletion, so this needs discussing at AfD not here. I've not looked to see whether the BLAR was appropriate at the time it was done but it's clearly incorrect now. Thryduulf (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
    Those links are just to sites where such RPF could be found. They might be primary sources for original research, but that's not appropriate for Wikipedia. Perhaps reliable secondary sources do exist about the topic somewhere, but they weren't used to write the early 2006 article so the article is unlikely to survive AfD. The article reads as a fan's observations about a community which they participated in or interacted with. I could understand referring it to AfD if it were plausible that something could be salvageable, but that's not the case here. That leaves only the question of whether it's appropriate to redirect the title to somewhere, which is a question that can be answered at RfD. – Scyrme (talk) 16:58, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
    i wouldn't even say it wouldn't be eligible for a1, as per above, the links would only be useful for someone who already knows about those fanfics and their context to find more of them (what's this alan rickman community the pre-blar content refers to?), so the rule you're referring to wouldn't apply even if it actually existed consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 20:36, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete. There is nothing here worth restoring. AfD is not RfD's dumpster, we can and should take care of our own trash. -- Tavix (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
    RfD and AfD serve different purposes, have different audiences, and we are not "dumping trash" by sending articles to their proper location, rather we are doing the exact opposite. Thryduulf (talk) 02:08, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
    to avoid rehashing the usual routine, have you actually looked into the pre-blar content beyond whether or not it would be speediable (and seemingly missed the potential for a1), or for sources before procedurally suggesting that the topic might be notable? because i can say that i've found a bit of potentially usable stuff to warrant a mention in real person fiction in one of them, but it wasn't in the pre-blar content (and on a spoilery note, isn't of stuff that has much overlap with the pre-blar content, for better or worse) consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 12:25, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
    to avoid rehashing the usual routine, have you actually looked into the pre-blar content beyond whether or not it would be speediable yes, although it's not really relevant as the only time it is ever appropriate to delete article content at RFD is when it is speediable or has already been the subject of consensus discussion in an appropriate venue (and no, RfD is not an appropriate venue to discuss notability). Thryduulf (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
    yes, it is relevant, and your rationales for stating otherwise are demonstrably incorrect. there's no policy that states that rfd can't be used to discuss notability at all, no policy that states that article content in redirect history can't be deleted in rfd unless speediable, no policy that states that any of this would invalidate or take priority over an already-occurring discussion (or prevent what would then be a snow close in this hypothetical), the one policy that comes close to doing any of this still only suggests not taking it to rfd in the first place if the blar is contested (which you've only implied here and not even bothered with beforehand, but consensus about this thus far is that it only wasn't appropriate because it should've been deleted outright, which sounds more like a rationale for not restoring), and none of this would need to happen if an article could demonstrate notability for the topic, which is why i'll just dump the few sources i've found to be usable below so someone with more knowledge about harry drug addict can potentially add it someday, need be damned~
    if you want to say that rfd can't be used to discuss notability of articles, that's at best not inherently wrong, but rfds can be and commonly are closed based on notability for redirects and/or as necessary for them (including to the extent of affecting article content), and as is, no article currently establishes harry potter rpfs as a notable topic, so this would indeed be dumping trash for no good reason, and wouldn't be the first time the audience argument was extremely easy to misconstrue as an assumption of incompetence consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 15:55, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
    It is a fundamental part of Wikipedia philosophy that nothing is deleted without consensus discussion in the correct venue (with all the advertising associated with that venue) unless it meets one or more speedy deletion criteria. It is well established that a contested BLAR should be reverted and the article content discussed in venues appropriate to discussing article content. This is a contested BLAR - I'm contesting it. The article content is more than sufficient to merit discussion in an article content discussion venue. Thryduulf (talk) 17:28, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
    this is more akin to the handwaving from ages ago, really, and i honestly doubt that "It is well established" will cut it when an entire discussion (it was at least 3.5 just in that area, but let's not worry about this part) about it wound up deliberately not making a concrete statement in policy about whether or not something going to rfd is appropriate. even then, i can cite multiple discussions that would imply that maybe there's no problem with people in rfd evaluating pre-blar content (like this one, or this one) consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 18:13, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
    At this point it's clear that any further comments would be futile as you're not interested in considering alternative views. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Delete in the jist of WP:XY and generally implausible topic. RPF is common with celebrities, hence the Real person fiction article, but not popular enough to get a split off article for Harry Potter. Not a useful redirect or article. I would agree with Tavix. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver ( it / he | talk to me, maybe? ) 16:51, 4 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).

Hairy Kane

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) 05:21, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

This nickname is not particularly common and is not mentioned at the target. While there is a place for unmentioned nicknames, this one seems to not particularly help the reader if unmentioned as it is not particularly difficult to figure that Hairy Kane is a reference to Harry Kane. Casablanca 🪨(T) 15:27, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Not supposed to be a nickname, its supposed to be a potential mishear similar to "Hairy Potter" or "Hairy Styles". That's what I intended Justcgi (talk) 15:43, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment Hairy Potter is a redlink, but Hair potter has existed since 2006 and Hairy Styles since 2024. The only other similar redirect I spotted looking at Special:prefixindex/Hariy was Hairy Cary, created in 2007. None of them have been discussed here. Thryduulf (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete - implausible redirect and I don't buy the explanation. GiantSnowman 18:07, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per Giant. Imagine if we start having hairy redirects to all Harrys! I think Thryduulf meant Hairy potter though. Jay 💬 16:58, 11 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).

Diphilus of Siphos

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 💬 07:03, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Implausible misspelling ("Siphnus" is different from "Siphos"; zero results on google). Delete. Duckmather (talk) 03:26, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nomination. Got no results for "Diphilus+of+Siphos" outside Wikipedia. I suspect the creator intended to make Diphilus of Siphnos (which is attested outside Wikipedia, and which I created as a redirect just now). – Scyrme (talk) 15:56, 4 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).

Juno Download

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#Juno Download

Moort-ak Waading

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#Moort-ak Waading

Unmentioned Aboriginal Australian place names

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 14#Unmentioned Aboriginal Australian place names

Vancouvers

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. Hatnote added. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 01:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Add a hatnote at the destination to indicate Vancouver (disambiguation), where several topics can be pluralized to "Vancouvers", such as the airplane model (which already appears in Wikipedia articles as "Vancouvers" referring to the airplane). OR retarget to the disambiguation page as {{R from plural}} / {{R from ambiguous term}} / {{R from partial disambiguation}} , where the band and the pluralizable targets are listed -- I have been informed these changes should have an RfD --- NOTE The VancouversThe Vancouvers also targets the current destination -- ~2026-25149-07 (talk) 08:31, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:37, 4 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).

3x3 basketball at the 2021 Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games

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) Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:49, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Event was cancelled; so this redirect is redundant. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:39, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. That the event was cancelled doesn't make the redirect redundant - not everybody will know that. What matters is whether there is enough relevant content at the target, and I think there is - just. Thryduulf (talk) 22:33, 20 April 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ edits 04:33, 27 April 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:37, 4 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).

York Bay

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 Eastbourne, New Zealand. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:48, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

York Bay is a separate locality and bay to Days Bay https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/48932

Whilst it is mentioned at the target it is only in passing and not in a way that really benefits a reader looking for York Bay. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:44, 4 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).

Background of the Iran–Israel war

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. The fate of these redirects depends on where Iran–Israel war points; i.e., the outcome of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 10 § Israel–Iran war. It doesn't make sense to continue this discussion while that one is ongoing. These redirects should be renominated or otherwise changed when that RfD concludes. (non-admin closure) J947 ‡ edits 00:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

{{R from merge}}. However, Iran–Israel war is not a redirect to Twelve-Day War anymore, Background to the Iran–Israel war became ambiguous with 2026 Iran war#Background, and given it was renamed into Prelude to the Twelve-Day War before the merge, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran–United States war may decide that Prelude to the 2026 Iran war became the primary topic, so probably retarget? LIrala (talk) 03:55, 4 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).

Iran–United States war (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. Jay 💬 06:59, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

These all should be kept in case Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran–United States war decides that the disambiguation page still needs to exist under the title Iran–United States war (disambiguation). However, most AfD votes are for redirecting so should these exist if retargeted to, eg. Iran War (disambiguation)?
Of course these should be deleted if the current target page is redirected to the ongoing war plain article, unless RfD has a consensus to retarget. LIrala (talk) 03:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

  • Keep (for now) - This nomination is premature. That said, if the current target is redirected these redirects should be deleted because their target would no longer be a disambiguation page. These redirects exist to allow for intentionally linking to the disambiguation page currently located at their target; they're no longer needed if there is no disambiguation page at Iran–United States war anymore. – Scyrme (talk) 04:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Delete now that the AfD has concluded. – Scyrme (talk) 18:22, 8 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).

Ggy freelance

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 💬 06:48, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Implausible alteration (the only arguable attestation Google finds is this site, and even then it's actually (Swi)ggy freelance, not ggy freelance on its own). Delete. Duckmather (talk) 02:42, 4 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).

Fenno-

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 11#Fenno-

Coronarctus species

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 💬 06:47, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

The rationale of my nomination below applies. These species-to-genus redirects should be deleted to return them to red. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Plantdrew (talk) 16:09, 4 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).

Tholoarctus species

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 💬 06:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

These are redirects from a species to its genus. Accepted species are presumed to be notable per WP:NSPECIES, so these should be deleted to return them to red. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:20, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Plantdrew (talk) 16:08, 4 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).

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks