Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion

A little idea – add a link to Special:Search/"REDIRECTNAME", with the quotation marks, at the top of each RfD. Thoughts? We should avoid crowding that toolbar, but personally I'd use it way more than the talk page or even the WhatLinksHere and pageviews links. J947 ‡ ^edits 03:30, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

• Support. Another link that can be added is of the target talk page. Jay 💬 15:03, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
• I too would find search useful. When I'm active here I very often look at page views and history, links and talk are very useful where relevant too (although this is less often) so I wouldn't support removing any of them. Target talk isn't something that's often relevant and with popups is available with one click anyway. Logs (especially move logs) for the redirect and target can be useful too, but are only really needed in cases where there is a lot of history so I'm not sure adding that would justify the screen estate. Thryduulf (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2025 (UTC)
• This is a great idea. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 01:42, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Given the support here, I've taken this to Template talk:Rfd2 § Adding a link to internal search looking for implementation. J947 ‡ ^edits 07:24, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Can anyone figure out what's going on with this discussion? Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 18:36, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm not positive, but it looks like there's a tag nesting error in Template:Poem. It includes this code: <<noinclude></noinclude>poem> . - Eureka Lott 20:13, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

The template isn't being directly called; it was substed. The <poem> tag is probably causing the issue. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:20, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

See mw:Extension:Poem. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:22, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I've opened a Phabricator ticket: T414894 voorts (talk/contributions) 20:24, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

I've proposed a new CSD that may be of interest to RfD regulars. See Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion § New CSD: Redirect's. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:17, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

I can't work out why entries for days 17, 18, 19 January are not transcluding correctly into Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:17, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

The page has hit the limit of expensive parser function calls. If you look at the page source and ctrl+f for "limit report" you will see among other entries Expensive parser function count: 580/500. The page is also in Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls. You're going to need someone more technical than me to work out what templates we are using result in the expensive calls. Thryduulf (talk) 13:40, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 23 § Raadkamer. J947 ‡ ^edits 21:37, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello all,

A discussion has been created regarding the topic of redirects that end in 's. I'd like to invite all regular RfD participants to comment there, as the discussion could lead to a resolution on what to do with all of them.

See here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Redirect#Otherwise-implausible_redirects_originally_intended_as_editor_assistance_(i.e._possessive_redirects) MEN KISSING (she/they) T - C - Email me! 04:34, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

 Please see: A continuation of this discussion now at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect#Possessive redirects (take 2). This follows a couple other related discussions which are linked in the current thread. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:35, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Is it possible the redirect for discussion entries could be subscribable like other similar dicussions and talk page entries? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:15, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

This would require either a software change (see T275943) or changing the header level of each entry to level 2. The latter would be simple on the face of it, but it would require then changing the daily header to level 1 (normally reserved for the page heading, e.g. "Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion" at the top of this page), which would (I think) cause all sorts of issues on the main Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion page. I agree it would be very useful, but if it were simple it would have been done long ago. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

I see, thank you. You seem to be everywhere answering these kinds of questions. Much appreciated. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:04, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Despite 29 January currently being the oldest page transcluded or listed on the main WP:RfD page, I've just closed or relisted open discussions from the 25, 26, 27 and 28 January. There weren't any open ones on the 24th but I've not looked further back.

If we aren't going to transclude all log pages with open discussions then at the very least we need to include links to them in a list so that they don't get forgotten. Thryduulf (talk) 13:41, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

There are multiple discussions at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 10 and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 13, plus one each at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 11#Rose (singer) and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 February 19#Hauntings that are overdue for closing. There are a couple on the February 10 page I could close but I've run out of time; all the others are ones I'm involved with so need to be dealt with by someone else. Thryduulf (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Please create this nomination page: No longer mentioned at target page. Delete as WP:REDLINK. ~2026-15650-77 (talk) 08:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)