This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 16, 2023.
Wikipedia:WX
- 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. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
23:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
This page was previously redirected to Wikipedia:WikiProject_X, but another editor decided to redirect it to a completely unrelated redirect page, which I must discuss.
Q
𝟤
𝟪
15:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The retargeting seems sensible enough to me, it has no uses from it's previous target and
Wikipedia:WikiProject_X is shut down and dead.
192.76.8.86 (
talk)
19:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I am responsible for both WikiProject X and Workspaces and I do not agree at all that they are "completely unrelated." One is a successor to the other. In any event, the "WX" shortcut was created by a person uninvolved with the original project, several years after it went defunct, and before I re-assigned the redirect I checked to make sure it was not in use as a shortcut in discussions or other contexts, and it wasn't. This is a non-controversy.
Harej (
talk)
12:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,
Rosguill
talk
19:56, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Noting that
WP:WPWX targets WikiProject Weather. I tried WP:WX to get to Weather today (for some reason... I know the shortcut is WPWX, not to mention I have it in superjump), so a hatnote to it is probably in order, though it'd probably be more useful targeting Workspaces.
Skarmory
(talk •
contribs)
09:07, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I think a hat note would be fine, on either page. I'm somewhat surprised "WP:WX" didn't already redirect there.
Harej (
talk)
01:06, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- @
Harej: Were you referring to "WP:WPWX" by any chance? Or are you saying that you are surprised "WP:WX" didn't already redirect to WikiProject Weather?
Jay
💬
08:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I was surprised that WP:WX didn't already redirect to WikiProject Weather seeing as WP:WPWX did.
Harej (
talk)
13:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Ok, thanks. It is now not clear if you are preferring the current target or WikiProject Weather for WP:WX.
Jay
💬
14:21, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I would prefer if WP:WX redirects to its current target since it did not previously target WikiProject Weather or another active page (as mentioned the redirect was assigned after its target went inactive).
Harej (
talk)
04:16, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CLYDE
TALK TO ME/
STUFF DONE (please
mention me on reply)
22:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Diabeetus
- 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
Wilford Brimley#Personal life.
Jay
💬
22:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
Serves no purpose. It's just how
Wilford Brimley says "Diabetes". If it deserves to exist at all, it should redirect to
Wilford Brimley#Personal life, where it goes into "Diabeetus" as a
meme. If not that, than an actual article for it, per the precedent set by
nucular. Sincerely, --
AugustusAudax (
talk|
contribs) P.S:
Aliens exist
00:42, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Hi
AugustusAudax. Did you read the two previous deletion discussions that resulted in keeping this redirect? What has changed since then? --
MZMcBride (
talk)
00:48, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- No. Can I see the link to them? Sincerely, --
AugustusAudax (
talk|
contribs) P.S:
Aliens exist
00:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Added.
J947 †
edits
01:05, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep never heard of this Brimley fellow, but I've seen the term diabeetus being thrown around.
Draken Bowser (
talk)
08:49, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Change target to Wilford brimley. Even if DB (the other one) doesn’t recognize it, this meme is most associated with Brimley, not the disease.
Dronebogus (
talk)
12:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment This is hard since in general I think a plausible misspelling should go to subject. But I don't know any plausible way to mention the meme-aspect (which I think is encyclopedic for Wikipedia) on that article and it should be contained to Brimley's, which unlike the 2010 discussion does mention the ads/his pronunciation of it. So. I guess either keep or re-target to
Wilford Brimley#Personal life with a more visible (maybe hatnote?) link to Diabetes. And of course if re-targeted and Brimley is restructured (which it probably needs some), re-targeting to a better placement within the article could be done without discussion.
Skynxnex (
talk)
15:09, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate?
Dronebogus (
talk)
16:14, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I'm a fairly big fan of disambiguation pages in general so no objections if other support it Since it is a fairly contentious subject.
Skynxnex (
talk)
16:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I would support a dab.
Draken Bowser (
talk)
15:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep - phoentic spelling of the word and used by many.
Pageviews shows it is used.
Canterbury Tail
talk
17:31, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,
Rosguill
talk
21:17, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Wilford Brimley#Personal life where the misspelling is discussed. Most users using this spelling are seeking content about the term itself, not unintentionally spelling diabetes. For the minority who are, there are links to diabetes-relevant articles in that section. Distant second choice, keep, but absolutely do not delete, as this is clearly a valid phonetic alternative to the proper spelling, and gets use for that reason.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
19:14, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Also, I don't think disambguation makes sense here, where the two entries would be a misspelling and a person using that misspelling phonetically- not really two independent uses of the term that would normally require disambiguation, but instead two potential targets for the same use.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
19:20, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CLYDE
TALK TO ME/
STUFF DONE (please
mention me on reply)
22:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Puff Up
Gooey Bomb
- 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, default to retarget to
sticky bomb. Consensus leaning that way, but an insufficient quorum in this instance to reach a consensus. Relisting once more not a particularly good use of community time here.
(non-admin closure)
J947 †
edits
04:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Not mentioned in target.
QuicoleJR (
talk)
19:56, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For some input on the retargeting suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoris
talk!
20:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Maulana Zubair Ahmed
- 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. Delete reasoning has been mooted by the addition of a duly-sourced mention at the target. signed,
Rosguill
talk
09:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Subject is no longer affiliated with target. The base redirect
Zubair Ahmed no longer exists as a redirect, following
its RfD. These entries could not be bundled along with that RfD. Delete.
Jay
💬
19:09, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Struck off the delete. Keep or refine per below, thanks to information added at the target.
Jay
💬
07:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete both per nom.
* Pppery *
it has begun...
17:06, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Hmm, the previous RfD was actually super easy to resolve without getting into the weeds. There used to be a sentence describing Zubair Ahmed as a "former imam" of the Mosque with three sources. I don't see why that was removed, it can be the first step of listing all the former imams (and their dates) once known. So I have restored that sentence and then reverted the move of the redirect accordingly.
That being said, the mention described him as "Zubair Ahmed", not "Maulana Zubair Ahmed". This form of the name is not attested, so delete. --
Tavix (
talk)
23:47, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I had tried adding that sentence back during the previous RfD itself, but did not know a good way to do that, thought will be out of
WP:PROPORTION, and just for the sake of the RfD. The wordings of "was a former" that you have added may not be proper by the way, being a
pleonasm. It can be "is a former imam" or "was an imam".
Jay
💬
07:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- I don't think it's out of proportion to have this, I see articles for institutions that have a list of their leaders (eg: presidents, chancellors, CEOs, bishops) so I can see a scope for a list of imams for this mosque. I thought about separating this into its own section to make this more obvious, but thought it'd be a bit too awkward because there is currently only one that has been identified. Note well taken about "former", that word has been removed. And yes, it is absolutely for the sake of the RfD. I hated seeing the edit history buried in the wrong namespace like that, so I did something about it. --
Tavix (
talk)
12:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- By the way
Tavix, none of the three references to that sentence actually mention a Zubair Ahmed. There's a Zubair Hassan, but that's all. Neither any of the independent sources at the previous article. So, yeah that's not great.
J947 †
edits
04:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. I found a reference that attests him as "Maulana Zubair Ahmed", so I have updated the article accordingly. --
Tavix (
talk)
20:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Refine both to
Kakrail Mosque#History as {{
R from move}}s, but more importantly per our article
Mawlānā and
the move rationale. Even in the unlikely instance that this isn't actually his title, it's a plausible guess at it.
J947 †
edits
04:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per Tavix, now that it is mentioned. ----
Patar knight -
chat/
contributions
00:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Martial Arts All-Stars (Kirby)
Wikipedia:Vegan
- 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.
✗
plicit
23:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Retarget to
Wikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, as this is a more likely search target than an essay that doesn't actually seem that relevant to veganism at all
Joseph
2302 (
talk)
16:26, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget per nom. 〜
Askarion
✉
18:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. "It could be a WikiProject shortcut" will always be the weakest reson to retarget something, because it generally misstates how shortcuts are used: based on what people think expect to find when typing them, not on what would make the most sense. While
WP:Vegan is little-used, it is an alternative capitalization of
WP:VEGAN, which has 77 backlinks, almost all of them (at a glance) intending the veganism parable. So, empirically, this redirect points where people would expect it to go. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
18:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per Tamzin, also the current target has a hatnote to the proposed target. --
Lenticel (
talk)
02:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per Tamzin and Lenticel. Ambiguity is already solved by the hatnote at the current target. So no need to retarget anywhere else.
CycloneYoris
talk!
23:44, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Proton (company)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23#Proton (company)
Suri Cruise
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23#Suri Cruise
Niels De Vriendt
- 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.
✗
plicit
14:36, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Not mentioned at target articles. Lots of non-professionals were removed from the list
here including De Vriendt.
Joseph
2302 (
talk)
12:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
7 virgins
- 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.
✗
plicit
14:36, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Incorrect numbers of virgins. I don't see how these two redirects would be useful for someone looking for "72 virgins". These numbers of virgins also not mentioned in the target article.
Colgatepony234 (
talk)
17:57, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoris
talk!
11:15, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Rail Asset First Management
- 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. Pleasantly fast arrival at a quorum post-relist. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
17:17, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Could possibly fall under the CSD criterion
WP:R3 as it might be an implausible typo? But I’ve decided to hold a discussion here, because I’m not sure if even I agree that it should be deleted, or if others would delete.
Fork99 (
talk)
09:07, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoris
talk!
11:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Category feature
- 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
Category.
✗
plicit
14:36, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Ambiguous, mediawiki is not the only thing in existence with a categorisation feature, it's a fairly common website feature, for example.
192.76.8.65 (
talk)
10:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Delorted
- 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.
✗
plicit
14:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Not mentioned in the target article.
Dominicmgm (
talk)
10:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Rehearsing gunfight scene in USA
- 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
SNOW delete. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
17:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Highly highly ambiguous, there is no reason we should assume that someone searching for this is specifically looking for the 2021 rust shooting incident.
192.76.8.65 (
talk)
10:16, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Gun rehearsals in USA entertainment
- 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
SNOW delete. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
21:03, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Ungramatical, ambiguous, uses terminology I cannot find in use anywhere. What is a "Gun rehearsal"? "USA entertainment" is not grammatically correct. Why should we assume that this rather ambiguous term refers to a specific shooting incident in 2021?
192.76.8.65 (
talk)
10:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as misleading --
Lenticel (
talk)
00:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom.
BD2412
T
03:35, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Very awkwardly worded. It does at least go to a section which sort of discusses this, so perhaps leaning towards "weak delete", but highly implausible, and recently created too so no particular benefit from keeping.
A7V2 (
talk)
07:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom --
Devoke
water
20:13, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete for unlikely wording: "gun rehearsals"? "USA entertainment"? Also, implies that there's similar info on gun incidents during film production in other countries; what if people added info on the controversy in other countries? And it isn't specific to rehearsals, the controversy doesn't exclude accidents that happen or could happen during actual shooting. Misguided.
Largoplazo (
talk)
20:30, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Add rendering rules to Graphite
- 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
SNOW delete. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
22:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
The target article includes no information on adding rendering rules to graphite, and it should not include information on adding rendering rules to graphite, because wikipedia is not a how to guide or instruction manual (
WP:NOTHOWTO).
192.76.8.65 (
talk)
10:06, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom.
A7V2 (
talk)
07:56, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete An imperative sentence isn't a useful redirect. It's like "Add sugar to butter" or "Add vermiculite to your soil". Who searches like that?
Largoplazo (
talk)
20:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Formatted like a search query not a title or topic. It's what someone might search if they were looking for "how to add rendering rules to Graphite", but omitted "how to" for brevity or to avoid irrelevant results that might also include "how to (add)...". Search queries should be handled by the search engine. (Also, the current target was the first result after this redirect when I searched this through Wikipedia's search engine so the reader is likely to find it even without the redirect, although I doubt readers are likely to search for this information on Wikipedia in the first place.) –
Scyrme (
talk)
21:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. --
Devoke
water
00:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b}
11:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Americans journey to Egypt with the hope of converting Christians to Protestantism
- 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
SNOW delete. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
21:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Ambiguous and an utterly implausible search term. A sentence taken from the article is way too long to be a good redirect, and it is rather ambiguous - there is no reason to assume that this would uniquely refer to this specific Christian mission.
192.76.8.65 (
talk)
09:58, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Divine incomprehensibility
- 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 mooted
US by article creation with thanks to
StAnselm. Article is at
Divine incomprehensibility; title-case variant redirected there. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she|they|xe)
15:40, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
The Christian God is not the only one to be incomprehensible (see
God in Judaism,
God in Islam), and per the deletion decision at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 25#Incomprehensibility of God (see also
the discussion that led to the deletion of 'Infinity of God'). There is no good retarget. Therefore, I propose deletion.
Veverve (
talk)
09:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Create an article on this topic, as I proposed in the discussion regarding
Incomprehensibility of God referenced in the nom.
BD2412
T
03:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete I agree with the nomination, there is no single potential target, singling this one out is unreasonably narrow. Yes, there could be an article with this title.
Largoplazo (
talk)
20:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Create an article on this topic per BD2412. In fact, I was hoping to create the article soon, anyway, but I'm still trying to get my head around the topic...
St
Anselm (
talk)
22:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: "Create an article on this topic" isn't a helpful !vote. Participants ought to confine their !votes to outcomes that are feasible without qualification, outcomes that aren't contingent on such factors as to whether the closing administrator has the background needed to create a reasonable article on the topic, the time to create it, and an interest in doing so; or whether the admin has the power to force someone else with the requisite knowledge to create it.
Largoplazo (
talk)
23:36, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment:
Incomprehensibility of God was re-created and should be added to this RfD discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
09:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: It's not mentioned yet, but ...
StAnselm created an article draft at
Divine incomprehensibility.
Steel1943 (
talk)
22:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Vårberg Tunnel Rail 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 delete.
✗
plicit
14:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Nonsensical name created by a sockpuppet.
Devoke
water
09:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Speedy delete:
WP:G5 should probably cover this, but if not this is also the result of an editor who as noted by the nominator is indeffed for being a sock who also moved Stockholm metro stations from "X metro station" to "X Tunnel Rail station" name without discussion based on what seems like a literal translation of the Swedish word tunnelbana which split up means tunnel rail, but the system itself is only called that in a few places I have found online (not an overwhelmingly popular name) and I have not found it to be used in conjunction with Vårberg station anywhere.
Tartar
Torte
15:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per above, speedy deleting per
WP:G5 if possible because this was created by an indefinitely blocked sockpuppet.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk |
contribs)
09:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Dr. R
- 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.
✗
plicit
14:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
Not a valid alternative name.
MSMST1543 (
talk)
08:32, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Korean science fiction
Template:Fake
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 23#Template:Fake
Shatec institutes