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.
Not sure this is a plausible typo (or what people would expect when searching this term, so it's worse than having nothing). Previously was discussed (and deleted) at RfD and no one suggested this target.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 23:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - Clearly violates
WP:LEAST... this is very much and obviously not what someone would be looking for when searching for this term, and I don't think we have the actual information that this term refers to, so... since we don't have it, delete it. (if someone finds the actual information on wikipedia or wiktionary, please change my !vote to redirect there instead, but I'm at work so I can't search this right now)
Fieari (
talk) 23:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Implausible typo and is not what I'd expect if I were to, for whatever silly reason, search this term.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 19:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Human male sexuality. - The redirect to helicopter deck is an unlikely typo. There's minimal study on
this form of sexual gymnastics so there probably isn't enough content to keep it as a stub, though its a common phenomenon. Perhaps a physics paper will be published in the future to qualify for
WP:RS.
GobsPint (
talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I oppose retargeting without a mention, otherwise this is simply confusing to many.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 17:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTHOWTO. We don't have any information on this particular mating display.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
List of lists
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 current target,
List of lists of lists, is in the same namespace, but it's not a complete "list of lists" as not all lists on Wikipedia are listed in "Lists of X" articles, and it's a "list of lists of lists" rather than a direct "list of lists." Next,
Wikipedia:Contents/Lists has an approachable format and it's a "list of lists" rather than a "list of lists of lists," but it is also incomplete. And finally,
Category:Lists is a complete "list of lists," but it's a category.
I propose that a disambiguation page be created containing these three pages as they all have their pros and cons, making none of them suitable as the sole redirect target. –
BrandonXLF (
talk) 09:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep and hatnote the other two. Jay 💬 11:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 22:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, local targets are preferred when feasible. I don't see the issue with the current target; it need not be complete. I don't think someone searching this is going to be misled or confused by where they end up. --
Tavix(
talk) 01:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Daniel Striped Tiger (band)
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. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Target was redirected to a different subject per an AfD so is no longer about a band.
* Pppery *it has begun... 21:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete but we could mention it at the target in which can I would favour keeping. Crouch, Swale (
talk) 19:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Netflix films no longer mentioned
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. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Star Wars™
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 💬 10:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
with the deletion of
Peppa Pig TM, this probably also deserves a discussion in the same vain.
Okmrman (
talk) 19:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete no one is going to go out of their way to try and get the special characters for TM to search for that when Star Wars would have come up by then anyway.
Canterbury Tailtalk 19:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™ per Canterbury Tail, implausible search term.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 23:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™. Useless. Cleo Cooper (
talk) 03:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™: Unless someone adds the TM character to keyboards any time soon. StreetcarEnjoyer(talk) 18:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: impossible to write without knowledge of special characters, and also
WP:SNOW by this point.
Cambalachero (
talk) 18:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Eh…it looks fairly clear what the result is probably going to be at this point, but I’m not convinced that this redirect is problematic enough to warrant deletion. All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 10:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™: Someone would need to copy-paste the trademark character from a Unicode website, which would be time-consuming. Oh, wait-
TWOrantulaTM (
enter the web) 08:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Ductal is a product of Lafarge but isn't mentioned on the article at all. The redirect exists due to a 2015 deletion discussion of the article
[1], I believe a redirect to
duct would be better given ductal is the adjectivial form of duct.
Traumnovelle (
talk) 07:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Redirected via an AFD, no longer mentioned in the article ... it's time.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Comedy Shorts Gamer (entertainer)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 06:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I just added mention. Brother of the subject - refine to the #Early life section. If kept,
Comedy Shorts Gamer which is protected, may also be recreated as a redirect. Jay 💬 12:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Any thoughts? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: The "added mention"
Jay is referring to spells the subject as "ComedyShortsGamer" (no spaces). Stating this for editors to be able to find the mention, otherwise I have no opinion.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
National culture
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.
"National culture" is mentioned on the target page, but it isn't a subhead, and this seems to me to be a strange article to redirect this to. I'm not sure someone who searches for "national culture" will understand why they're on this page. I'm not excited about any of the alternatives I considered (
Nationalism?), maybe someone here has a better idea?
asilvering (
talk) 03:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
National identity or the more abstract
Imagined community? Not sure what someone searching for "National culture" would be looking for exactly, but these seem better than Nation-state.
CMD (
talk) 07:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. I recommend searching the
nation state page for the exact query "cultur". Try to read the portions where those terms appear. The relevant information is in there, but it's not collected as one topic. I would like to see this info collected somewhere on wikipedia. But for now, the best way/ best place on wikip to understand this broad topic is to understand modern nation-state nationalism broadly, which is also not a casual task. Ethnicity/ race, language, and religion (whether monistic or varied within the state), are main themes you'll encounter. Then you'll see what a national culture is in a given nation state. Education is also part of projects of national culture.
skakEL 21:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete and defer to search results. We have multiple articles that would fit as targets for this as a keyword search, and that's what we have a search engine for.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per footnote [b]: ...alternatively referred to as Fuck: A Documentary and The F-Bomb: A Documentary. --
Tavix(
talk) 17:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget per Tavix. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (per Jay's comment under
#The F-Bomb (film) - the lead introduces the subject as a documentary film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The F-Bomb (film)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"The F-Bomb (documentary)" redirect was deleted today, but I don't know why. I didn't know it was listed at RfD. When I had made the above comment, it was not. Jay 💬 17:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per footnote [b]: ...alternatively referred to as Fuck: A Documentary and The F-Bomb: A Documentary. --
Tavix(
talk) 17:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget per Tavix. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (per Jay). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
F-Bomb (movie)
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.
Keep to be consistent with the
The F-Bomb (movie) redirect suggestion as per its RfD discussion. Jay 💬 05:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: 2x (
edit conflict) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film), a movie titled (at least in part) "F-Bomb", per Tavix' arguments in the related discussions above.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the article introduces the subject as a documentary film, and - as evidenced by
our article - movie is a synonym for film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:53, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Editors could not agree about whether the factual inaccuracies in the title outweighed its potential usefulness as a plausible search term.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 20:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Jax 0677: Why?
WP:CHEAP doesn't explain why this redirect should be kept, it explains the general state of redirects. That's why you'll rarely see others cite it at RfD, it doesn't say anything in particular. Instead, it'd be more helpful to explain why you created it and why it may be a useful redirect, despite being inaccurate. --
Tavix(
talk) 15:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Reply - Some people do not know that the abortion was performed in Indiana. Additionally, the redirect is not blocking any other article from being created. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 20:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Searching this term is entirely plausible, as the title lends itself to potential confusion by mentioning both Ohio and Indiana.
TNstingray (
talk) 23:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. This is fine. Someone searching for this term will find out the facts of the case.
BD2412T 02:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, Wikipedia is not a search engine, redirects should not be accommodating inaccurate keywords cobbled together into a never-before-seen title. As the abortion was not performed in Ohio, this cannot be an alternative name for the subject. Typing this into the search bar is far more insightful than maintaining this as a redirect, as readers will see the correct title and realize "Ah, it was the Indiana abortion case; the abortion was not performed in Ohio". This redirect currently causes confusion and presents a faulty equalization that a Ohio-abortion case = Indiana-abortion case, as there's no mention of a "Ohio-abortion misconception" or anything that would imply such a misconception. The redirect in question does not appear written at the target page (as it's untrue), nor does it appear anywhere on Wikipedia (as it's untrue). Utopes(talk / cont) 07:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirects don't have to be mentioned in the article; there is no requirement for that.
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 23:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I never said that being mentioned is a requirement. Thousands don't, probably. But not being mentioned, heck, not even ever alluded to, absolutely demolishes any of the little motivation for keeping misleading information in the form of a redirect void-of-context. Utopes(talk / cont) 22:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep as a plausible – though apparently not popular – search term, because not everyone is going to remember where the abortion physically happened. It sounds like the concern is that some editors parse the title as meaning that Ohio was the location of the abortion, rather than the (usual) location of the child – i.e., that "2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old in Ohio" is equal to "2022 abortion performed in Ohio on a 10-year-old" and is factually inaccurate, but "2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old from Ohio" would be accurate. I see their point, but I think that asking for grammatical perfection in a redirect is not necessary. The point of a redirect is to get people to the article that contains the accurate facts, and this will achieve that goal. Just as I think the incorrect hyphenation is not a good reason to delete a redirect, I think the suboptimal preposition isn't a good reason to delete it. Also, it looks like
an RM during the first weeks of the article's existence introduced the "in Ohio" idea.
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 00:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"Plausible, but not very popular" is a wild misrepresentation of the fundamental facts. This makes the assumption that A: writing a backwards, incorrect, non-existent / Google search prompt is "plausible", and B: a grand total of zero views with the last 12 months is "apparently not popular"... "Apparently"?? Even with the clunky overly-specific and still somehow incorrect title out of the way, was there a world that this title was even going to get a view? No, it's completely unnatural and would be expected to exist by zero people on Wikipedia. If you ask 100 people to describe the case in 30 different ways, I'm nearly positive that this title wouldn't appear ever, much less make the shortlist for likely and useful redirects. This is a search term, not worthy of a redirect. Search terms as redirects are a horrible precedent as is, as there's literally infinite search terms in existence and not worthwhile to entertain as long as Wikipedia has a build-in search box that captures every single variety, and everything I've tried has led to 100% accurate results as long as the text exists.
And yet, with all of those tests, there are thousands of theoretical implausible search-term-redirects that could (and don't) exist. And all of the thousands would be far better options that
2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old in Ohio in its current state, as it's literally a lie. On the chance that this is naturally typed into Wikipedia, with someone asking themselves "was this abortion in Indiana or Ohio?", they get a wrong answer. Why click further? The title implies the events already, and the implication is simply untrue. There's like 30+ other redirects currently here that capture every reasonable (and unreasonable) outcome, this untruth variant is simply not necessary. It's harmful and confusing and deletable per
WP:RDEL #2. Utopes(talk / cont) 23:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 01:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Wikipedia is not Google, and even if it was, the redirect is still inaccurate.
DrowssapSMM 13:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete inaccurate and implausible search term. TarnishedPathtalk 09:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - search term with enough relevant facts to identify the target, and catches searches where the reader doesn't know (or care) which particular state the specific events occurred in.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
So does this mean that as long as a redirect is 80% correct, it doesn't matter if the remaining 20% is wrong/misleading because 80 is still a passing grade? There's an infinite number of 100% correct titles out there, I feel we should be focusing on redirecting those rather than phrases that are 90% or 80% or 70% correct; "close enough" isn't enough to redirect (the search bar solves all of those problems). Utopes(talk / cont) 17:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, that's exactly what it means. A redirect is meant to get readers to the information they're looking for, not penalize them for not already knowing certain specific (and to non-Americans, largely irrelevant) details of an event. Unless we have many articles on American children being sexually assaulted and then forced to travel to a different state for critical medical care that's denied to them in their home states for stupid religious reasons, "close enough" is just that: close enough. Taking them to the information they're obviously looking for is clearly better than taking them to an error message.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Okay... so throwing a hodgepodge of accurate enough words in a title gives one freedom to fill the remaining 20% with lies, I guess? Maybe nobody outside of America cares about the details and whether the abortion was in Indiana or Tennessee or Alaska or on the moon. Having unexplained lies in a title is inherently confusing, given that the 30 other ~implausible redirects that were created to this article are going to autofill here first. "Details being irrelevant" and "true accuracy doesn't matter" isn't just a pandora's box, it's a crushing typhoon of redirection malpractice. What error message would people see? The search results?? That's where readers go for 99.9% of the infinite search terms out there anyway. Utopes(talk / cont) 02:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep as a plausible search term. FrankAnchor 20:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete because often times you don't see the redirection header when viewing the article; hence, such incorrect redirects may cause confusion.
Bwrs (
talk) 05:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Steel1943 (
talk) 17:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
F-Bomb (documentary)
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 01:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep to be consistent with the
The F-Bomb (documentary) redirect, which the nom (correctly) fixed last week. Jay 💬 04:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"The F-Bomb (documentary)" redirect was deleted today, but I don't know why. I didn't know it was listed at RfD. When I had made the above comment, it was not. Jay 💬 07:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 02:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the target article introduces the subject as a documentary film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The F-Bomb (movie)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 02:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the article introduces the subject as a documentary film, and - as evidenced by
our article - movie is a synonym for film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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:2021 Wikimedia Foundation's actions in Chinese Wikipedia
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 above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as redirect creator (though I oppose a G7 speedy). While "Jim" is a common abbreviation for the
given name "James", it does not appear to translate the same way for the surname, thus making the redirect more unnecessary than I thought when creating it in 2009. FrankAnchor 14:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Implausible to a point where it could plausibly refer to someone else.
Steel1943 (
talk) 03:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
LeOld LeBald Le4and6
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep A variety of Le____ have been used to refer to LeBron James and nominator hasn't demonstrating any harm in this redirect existing. There are reasons other than typos for redirects existing and therefore nomination hasn't met deletion criteria. pbp 15:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Who is going to search "LeOld LeBald Le4and6" to find LeBron James? Someone just put together three random nicknames that are used to mock him, what is the point of having this?
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 20:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mazewaxie: That "someone" is actually the editor who you're replying to, since they're the ones who created the redirect.
CycloneYoristalk! 22:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom + disparaging nickname. Not every string of three vaguely plausible nicknames deserve a redirect, and there isn't evidence for these three specifically being found together as a nickname.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 23:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, absolutely useless and beyond unlikely to use this title to reach one of the most recognized athletes of all time. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom et al. Useless nonsense.
CycloneYoristalk! 22:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete This is a quote from Jordan
[2], but it is not mentioned so the redirect is unhelpful. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep As noted above, was a quote from Jordan. Nominator seems to have nominated NBA-related redirects en masse and doesn't seem to understand redirect rules. pbp 15:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The quote is from Jordan, but is it particularly relevant to have a redirect? Also it's never mentioned in Jordan's article.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 20:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
From what I've seen so far, the nominator understands the rules perfectly well. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as an unmentioned quote. Nothing about "ceilings" nor "roofs" ever is discussed at the target page. There is no context as to what this quote is, who said it, or why it's a redirect there (or what part of the page it is pertinent to). Michael Jordan is one of the greatest athletes of all time, so anyone that wants to reach his page can easily do so through his name or the 20 other redirects that point here. Making a conscious decision to type in "the ceiling is a roof" implies that searchers are looking for a specific topic, and such a topic is not covered at the target article or anywhere on Wikipedia. Its existence misleads readers into a wild goose chase to find non-existent material. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete No mention on the page, no demonstrated relevance, not
Wikiquote.—
Bagumba (
talk) 10:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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 team
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak delete This phrase appears to come from a quote by
Sergio Ramos which is mentioned in the article. I don't think that's enough to warrant a redirect, but I could be convinced otherwise if there is evidence that this is a more common nickname. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete and definitely don't keep, as a vague and unhelpful term that would be more suitable for any other topic related to god and a team from a religious sense. Utopes(talk / cont) 08:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: whilst they have been referred to as this at least once, I imagine a bunch of other sports teams will also have been referred to as this, as the term is vague.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. It is the most common nickname for him, but dates back to the 1970s. Anyone looking for him would surely be aware of his name and just type that.
Crowsus (
talk) 14:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep If It is the most common nickname for him as Crowsus asserts, then it should be added to the article. I don't see how this would be an implausible search term in that case. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: It's a valid nickname for him. "It's from the 1970s" doesn't make it less valid as a search term.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Eleven of Hearts
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - not included in this article and the section name after the # does not even exist any more. However, there are external links which has that but since Eleven of Hearts is more than one entity
[3], it is best served as it's own article, subject to notability, excluding the Gareth Bale trademark celebration.
Iggy (
Swan) (
Contribs) 16:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Leo Di
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, unnatural and unexpected chopping of first and last name, would not be searched and would not discourage readers from finding the main page. Utopes(talk / cont) 08:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Regordinho
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Also a possibly insulting redirect: "regordinho" is
Portuñol for "very fat" (literally), which is a play on Ronaldinho (similarly pronounced).
Bedivere (
talk) 00:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: not used in media, and seems to be being used as an insult.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 16:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, "you can't see me move" is not a phrase mentioned at the target. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - I don't remember creating this but it's not a worthwhile redirect
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete this arbitrary shortname that sees no use. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Chris Ronaldo
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as the subject is not called Chris, and there is no mention of "Chris " in the target article's prose. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Rehan ronaldo
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - I have not found evidence that this is an alternative name for Cristiano Ronaldo
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per no mention of Rehan at the target article. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The World's Top Goal Scorer 2011
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Corey Perry. Delete, there are other sports that also have top goal scorers. --
Tavix(
talk) 19:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, Wikipedia is not Google, this is not how we do redirects. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: as ambiguous, since many sports exists and have goal scorers.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 16:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Messidona
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:CHEAP. If found via Internet search, clarifies that it refers to Messi (and not Maradona).
Homei (
talk) 20:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, was going to delete based on being an implausible and unmentioned nickname, but after Homei's explanation my deletion is stronger, as this is now also an
WP:XY situation with
Maradona, and can understandably apply to either target due to incorporating both players' names equally. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Messimagician
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as Messimagician isn't mentioned at the target. Nobody would type this in after having already typed out "Messi", which redirects to Lionel already. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
LM19
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, no mention and no indication that this is a plausible alternative nickname of the subject, based on the content of the article. Anything can be an abbreviation, but in this format it seems unlikely. Messi is one of the most well known athletes of all time, and can be found easily. This redirect is not supported by content, as we have nothing to say about "LM19". Utopes(talk / cont) 07:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Joever
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Per
WP:SSRT. Do we really need to include such 4-chan internet slang with no encyclopedic value, a "word" not used in any articles?
Fram (
talk) 08:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 14:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
it's not joever til it's joever, and that entry is goated with the sauce
...apologies for whatever that was, and for the somewhat hidden pun. keep as there are sources cogsan(nag me)(stalk me) 11:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Clearly pretty cheap and redirects are allowed to be "unencyclopedic".
Okmrman (
talk) 04:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Dr. Seuss Enterprises
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, not because of incoming links (as those don't matter if there's nothing to show for it at the target), but keep because "Enterprises" is mentioned at the article, at least in March '24. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Kannagi (upcoming film)
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. Yet another upcoming film redirect divides editors on whether the remaining trickle of pageviews are sufficient to merit keeping.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 20:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This film released just about 4 months ago and is no longer upcoming. Plenty of time has past to the point that there is no more confusion for a 2023 movie, as it's well into 2024 now. Nobody ending up here who sees "upcoming film" in the title would be surprised by it's removal for a movie releasing last year. Utopes(talk / cont) 17:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Very strong keep this redirect got 169 hits in the 30 days prior to this nomination, it is extremely clearly still serving a useful purpose. It's been used every single day this year, almost always more than once.
Thryduulf (
talk) 19:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Thryduulf. We shouldn't delete a redirect that is being used by readers with relative frequency. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 21:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 18:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 10:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:UFILM, the film was released more than 30 days ago. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: still in use, and not ambiguous with another future film that I'm aware of.
WP:UFILM states that 'upcoming film' redirects should be nominated for deletion...at least 30 days after the film receives a title or wide release, in order to allow pageviews to taper off (my emphasis) -- 30 days is a minimum, not a requirement to delete after; and the current pageviews indicate that retaining this redirect would be helpful. All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 16:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Thryduulf and Smart kitten. Unambiguous and useful, pageviews have tapered off but they show it is still being used well. Try after a few months. Jay 💬 19:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Phone computer
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 deletePhone computer. No consensus for
Computer phone due to the split !votes. However, due to the unusually strong opposition to disambiguation, I'm choosing to retarget to
One Per Desk as the
WP:BARTENDER. That said, perhaps a fresh discussion on that one may generate a stronger consensus for...something? --
Tavix(
talk) 02:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This seems overly technical. Nobody would really refer to smartphones as a phone computer outside of drawing some comparisons between smartphones and computers.
Okmrman (
talk) 04:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. This is what a smartphone is, and I wouldn't be surprised if the terms were used before "smartphone" became the established term (I can't check as Google is refusing to show me results that are both verbatim and before a given time, and either one alone is overwhelmed by irrelevant results where the two words happen to be adjacent, especially in lists in adverts).
Thryduulf (
talk) 18:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment shouldn't this actually link to telco equipment? Such as a PBX or other phone computers --
65.92.247.66 (
talk) 07:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. The phrasing of these redirects makes me believe they could also refer to
Modem, thus making these redirects ambiguous.
Steel1943 (
talk) 04:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I reaffirm my "delete" per Ivanvector's comment: A disambiguation page would not be the solution since none of the subjects mentioned so far are title matches. Let Wikipedia search do its job instead.
Steel1943 (
talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 15:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. I think it is easy for English first speakers (or young people) to say they aren't needed, but they probably serve some utility and they perfectly describe what they are.
Dennis Brown -
2¢ 11:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Dabify. As Steel mentioned, a viable interpretation of this would be
Modem, being "a phone used by a computer". However, I'd also think that
VoIP phone-- a phone that uses the Internet instead of normal phone lines-- or
softphone-- a software program that could call other people, which could be downloaded and installed on a PC-- would be valid interpretations of "Phone computer" or "Computer phone". Given I'm sure none of the above- including
Smartphone (a phone which is a computer)-- would be a primary target, dabification is warranted. edited at 14:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (
talk) 12:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment continuing off of my already existing vote post: The way I see it, we have the following links to disambig between:
Modem, a device that allows a computer to access the internet using telephone lines
Smartphone, a cell phone that also has features analogous to a personal computer
VoIP phone, a phone that uses the Internet in leiu of normal phone lines
Softphone, a program allowing the use of a desktop or laptop computer to call others
Computerphone, also known as
One Per Desk, a hybrid telephone and computer sold by Sinclair QL
Someone searching these two prompts could be looking for any of the above. (Feel free to use this as the basis for a disambig page :3)
𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (
talk) 04:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - disambiguation pages are for topics that have the same title, not for manually compiled search indexes of possibly related keywords. We have a search engine for that, let it do its job.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: One more go… Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 09:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget Computer phone to
One Per Desk to match
Computerphone. Delete Phone computer per all as ambiguous but not suitable for a dab page. Jay 💬 18:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Disambiguate - given Jay's find of
Computerphone pointing to
One Per Desk, deletion seems undesirable as it would leave a redirect to a niche usage that is nevertheless justifiable as a search term and redirect. signed, Rosguilltalk 19:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete both; these phrases are incredibly ambiguous and not really common parlance for anything. Oppose disambiguation for the same reasons. —
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 03:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget Computer phone and delete Phone computer per Jay. Computer phone should be kept since a plausible target for it exists, and due to its similarities with
Computerphone.
CycloneYoristalk! 17:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm happy with disambiguation or with keeping. In addition to the points made above, "phone computer" is a very plausible search term for "computerphone" from someone who has misremembered the name of the old technology.
Thryduulf (
talk) 17:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete The low page views(low utility) on both of the redirects show that it is not a common search term. Since it is vague and potentially confusing, keeping is not an option. I oppose DABbing since the potiential targets are only vaguely related to either of the terms.
Catalk to me! 00:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Vague and ambiguous. Disambiguating is not the correct solution for the reasons given by Ivanvector. TarnishedPathtalk 01:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Colonial haiti
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.
Delete. Grammatical errors. (Haiti warrants capitalization and there is currently no redirect for “Colonial Haiti”). Orphan. Serves no useful purpose. Obvious technical error in its creation. Creator is currently serving an indefinite ban.
Savvyjack23 (
talk) 02:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Not useful, only has 255 pageviews per WMFcloud since it starting counting views back in 2015.
CitationsFreak (
talk) 02:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:CHEAP. Unambigous and correctly targeted. The only error here is the lack of capitalization, which is not implausible. The correctly capitalized version should be created as well. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
CommentUser:Savvyjack23 the error is not an obvious one as required for CSD, and
Template:R from miscapitalizations are created as a matter of routine. That the creator was subsequently blocked or banned has no bearing on a redirects suitability as only creations made in violation of a block or ban are subject to
WP:G5, and this predates it. Please instead try to ground your concerns in
WP:RFD#DELETE, thank you.
2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC (
talk) 16:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC, you continue to misread my comments. I didn’t mention that user made this edit while being banned and in violation of it, only that his edits should be more scrutinized since his ban is indefinite. Please stop replying back with
WP:G5.Thank you.
Savvyjack23 (
talk) 16:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Side-dump condola
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:02, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Unlikely typo/misspelling.
CycloneYoristalk! 08:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Not sure this is a plausible typo (or what people would expect when searching this term, so it's worse than having nothing). Previously was discussed (and deleted) at RfD and no one suggested this target.
Elli (
talk |
contribs) 23:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - Clearly violates
WP:LEAST... this is very much and obviously not what someone would be looking for when searching for this term, and I don't think we have the actual information that this term refers to, so... since we don't have it, delete it. (if someone finds the actual information on wikipedia or wiktionary, please change my !vote to redirect there instead, but I'm at work so I can't search this right now)
Fieari (
talk) 23:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Implausible typo and is not what I'd expect if I were to, for whatever silly reason, search this term.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 19:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Human male sexuality. - The redirect to helicopter deck is an unlikely typo. There's minimal study on
this form of sexual gymnastics so there probably isn't enough content to keep it as a stub, though its a common phenomenon. Perhaps a physics paper will be published in the future to qualify for
WP:RS.
GobsPint (
talk) 22:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I oppose retargeting without a mention, otherwise this is simply confusing to many.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 17:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTHOWTO. We don't have any information on this particular mating display.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
List of lists
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 current target,
List of lists of lists, is in the same namespace, but it's not a complete "list of lists" as not all lists on Wikipedia are listed in "Lists of X" articles, and it's a "list of lists of lists" rather than a direct "list of lists." Next,
Wikipedia:Contents/Lists has an approachable format and it's a "list of lists" rather than a "list of lists of lists," but it is also incomplete. And finally,
Category:Lists is a complete "list of lists," but it's a category.
I propose that a disambiguation page be created containing these three pages as they all have their pros and cons, making none of them suitable as the sole redirect target. –
BrandonXLF (
talk) 09:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep and hatnote the other two. Jay 💬 11:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 22:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, local targets are preferred when feasible. I don't see the issue with the current target; it need not be complete. I don't think someone searching this is going to be misled or confused by where they end up. --
Tavix(
talk) 01:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Daniel Striped Tiger (band)
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. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Target was redirected to a different subject per an AfD so is no longer about a band.
* Pppery *it has begun... 21:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete but we could mention it at the target in which can I would favour keeping. Crouch, Swale (
talk) 19:19, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Netflix films no longer mentioned
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. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Star Wars™
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 💬 10:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
with the deletion of
Peppa Pig TM, this probably also deserves a discussion in the same vain.
Okmrman (
talk) 19:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete no one is going to go out of their way to try and get the special characters for TM to search for that when Star Wars would have come up by then anyway.
Canterbury Tailtalk 19:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™ per Canterbury Tail, implausible search term.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 23:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™. Useless. Cleo Cooper (
talk) 03:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™: Unless someone adds the TM character to keyboards any time soon. StreetcarEnjoyer(talk) 18:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: impossible to write without knowledge of special characters, and also
WP:SNOW by this point.
Cambalachero (
talk) 18:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Eh…it looks fairly clear what the result is probably going to be at this point, but I’m not convinced that this redirect is problematic enough to warrant deletion. All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 10:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete™: Someone would need to copy-paste the trademark character from a Unicode website, which would be time-consuming. Oh, wait-
TWOrantulaTM (
enter the web) 08:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Ductal is a product of Lafarge but isn't mentioned on the article at all. The redirect exists due to a 2015 deletion discussion of the article
[1], I believe a redirect to
duct would be better given ductal is the adjectivial form of duct.
Traumnovelle (
talk) 07:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Redirected via an AFD, no longer mentioned in the article ... it's time.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Comedy Shorts Gamer (entertainer)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 06:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I just added mention. Brother of the subject - refine to the #Early life section. If kept,
Comedy Shorts Gamer which is protected, may also be recreated as a redirect. Jay 💬 12:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Any thoughts? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment: The "added mention"
Jay is referring to spells the subject as "ComedyShortsGamer" (no spaces). Stating this for editors to be able to find the mention, otherwise I have no opinion.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
National culture
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.
"National culture" is mentioned on the target page, but it isn't a subhead, and this seems to me to be a strange article to redirect this to. I'm not sure someone who searches for "national culture" will understand why they're on this page. I'm not excited about any of the alternatives I considered (
Nationalism?), maybe someone here has a better idea?
asilvering (
talk) 03:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
National identity or the more abstract
Imagined community? Not sure what someone searching for "National culture" would be looking for exactly, but these seem better than Nation-state.
CMD (
talk) 07:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. I recommend searching the
nation state page for the exact query "cultur". Try to read the portions where those terms appear. The relevant information is in there, but it's not collected as one topic. I would like to see this info collected somewhere on wikipedia. But for now, the best way/ best place on wikip to understand this broad topic is to understand modern nation-state nationalism broadly, which is also not a casual task. Ethnicity/ race, language, and religion (whether monistic or varied within the state), are main themes you'll encounter. Then you'll see what a national culture is in a given nation state. Education is also part of projects of national culture.
skakEL 21:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete and defer to search results. We have multiple articles that would fit as targets for this as a keyword search, and that's what we have a search engine for.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per footnote [b]: ...alternatively referred to as Fuck: A Documentary and The F-Bomb: A Documentary. --
Tavix(
talk) 17:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget per Tavix. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (per Jay's comment under
#The F-Bomb (film) - the lead introduces the subject as a documentary film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The F-Bomb (film)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"The F-Bomb (documentary)" redirect was deleted today, but I don't know why. I didn't know it was listed at RfD. When I had made the above comment, it was not. Jay 💬 17:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per footnote [b]: ...alternatively referred to as Fuck: A Documentary and The F-Bomb: A Documentary. --
Tavix(
talk) 17:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget per Tavix. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (per Jay). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
F-Bomb (movie)
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.
Keep to be consistent with the
The F-Bomb (movie) redirect suggestion as per its RfD discussion. Jay 💬 05:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: 2x (
edit conflict) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 18:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film), a movie titled (at least in part) "F-Bomb", per Tavix' arguments in the related discussions above.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the article introduces the subject as a documentary film, and - as evidenced by
our article - movie is a synonym for film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:53, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Editors could not agree about whether the factual inaccuracies in the title outweighed its potential usefulness as a plausible search term.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 20:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Jax 0677: Why?
WP:CHEAP doesn't explain why this redirect should be kept, it explains the general state of redirects. That's why you'll rarely see others cite it at RfD, it doesn't say anything in particular. Instead, it'd be more helpful to explain why you created it and why it may be a useful redirect, despite being inaccurate. --
Tavix(
talk) 15:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Reply - Some people do not know that the abortion was performed in Indiana. Additionally, the redirect is not blocking any other article from being created. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 20:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Searching this term is entirely plausible, as the title lends itself to potential confusion by mentioning both Ohio and Indiana.
TNstingray (
talk) 23:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. This is fine. Someone searching for this term will find out the facts of the case.
BD2412T 02:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, Wikipedia is not a search engine, redirects should not be accommodating inaccurate keywords cobbled together into a never-before-seen title. As the abortion was not performed in Ohio, this cannot be an alternative name for the subject. Typing this into the search bar is far more insightful than maintaining this as a redirect, as readers will see the correct title and realize "Ah, it was the Indiana abortion case; the abortion was not performed in Ohio". This redirect currently causes confusion and presents a faulty equalization that a Ohio-abortion case = Indiana-abortion case, as there's no mention of a "Ohio-abortion misconception" or anything that would imply such a misconception. The redirect in question does not appear written at the target page (as it's untrue), nor does it appear anywhere on Wikipedia (as it's untrue). Utopes(talk / cont) 07:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirects don't have to be mentioned in the article; there is no requirement for that.
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 23:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I never said that being mentioned is a requirement. Thousands don't, probably. But not being mentioned, heck, not even ever alluded to, absolutely demolishes any of the little motivation for keeping misleading information in the form of a redirect void-of-context. Utopes(talk / cont) 22:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep as a plausible – though apparently not popular – search term, because not everyone is going to remember where the abortion physically happened. It sounds like the concern is that some editors parse the title as meaning that Ohio was the location of the abortion, rather than the (usual) location of the child – i.e., that "2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old in Ohio" is equal to "2022 abortion performed in Ohio on a 10-year-old" and is factually inaccurate, but "2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old from Ohio" would be accurate. I see their point, but I think that asking for grammatical perfection in a redirect is not necessary. The point of a redirect is to get people to the article that contains the accurate facts, and this will achieve that goal. Just as I think the incorrect hyphenation is not a good reason to delete a redirect, I think the suboptimal preposition isn't a good reason to delete it. Also, it looks like
an RM during the first weeks of the article's existence introduced the "in Ohio" idea.
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 00:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"Plausible, but not very popular" is a wild misrepresentation of the fundamental facts. This makes the assumption that A: writing a backwards, incorrect, non-existent / Google search prompt is "plausible", and B: a grand total of zero views with the last 12 months is "apparently not popular"... "Apparently"?? Even with the clunky overly-specific and still somehow incorrect title out of the way, was there a world that this title was even going to get a view? No, it's completely unnatural and would be expected to exist by zero people on Wikipedia. If you ask 100 people to describe the case in 30 different ways, I'm nearly positive that this title wouldn't appear ever, much less make the shortlist for likely and useful redirects. This is a search term, not worthy of a redirect. Search terms as redirects are a horrible precedent as is, as there's literally infinite search terms in existence and not worthwhile to entertain as long as Wikipedia has a build-in search box that captures every single variety, and everything I've tried has led to 100% accurate results as long as the text exists.
And yet, with all of those tests, there are thousands of theoretical implausible search-term-redirects that could (and don't) exist. And all of the thousands would be far better options that
2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old in Ohio in its current state, as it's literally a lie. On the chance that this is naturally typed into Wikipedia, with someone asking themselves "was this abortion in Indiana or Ohio?", they get a wrong answer. Why click further? The title implies the events already, and the implication is simply untrue. There's like 30+ other redirects currently here that capture every reasonable (and unreasonable) outcome, this untruth variant is simply not necessary. It's harmful and confusing and deletable per
WP:RDEL #2. Utopes(talk / cont) 23:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 01:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Wikipedia is not Google, and even if it was, the redirect is still inaccurate.
DrowssapSMM 13:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete inaccurate and implausible search term. TarnishedPathtalk 09:56, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - search term with enough relevant facts to identify the target, and catches searches where the reader doesn't know (or care) which particular state the specific events occurred in.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
So does this mean that as long as a redirect is 80% correct, it doesn't matter if the remaining 20% is wrong/misleading because 80 is still a passing grade? There's an infinite number of 100% correct titles out there, I feel we should be focusing on redirecting those rather than phrases that are 90% or 80% or 70% correct; "close enough" isn't enough to redirect (the search bar solves all of those problems). Utopes(talk / cont) 17:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, that's exactly what it means. A redirect is meant to get readers to the information they're looking for, not penalize them for not already knowing certain specific (and to non-Americans, largely irrelevant) details of an event. Unless we have many articles on American children being sexually assaulted and then forced to travel to a different state for critical medical care that's denied to them in their home states for stupid religious reasons, "close enough" is just that: close enough. Taking them to the information they're obviously looking for is clearly better than taking them to an error message.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Okay... so throwing a hodgepodge of accurate enough words in a title gives one freedom to fill the remaining 20% with lies, I guess? Maybe nobody outside of America cares about the details and whether the abortion was in Indiana or Tennessee or Alaska or on the moon. Having unexplained lies in a title is inherently confusing, given that the 30 other ~implausible redirects that were created to this article are going to autofill here first. "Details being irrelevant" and "true accuracy doesn't matter" isn't just a pandora's box, it's a crushing typhoon of redirection malpractice. What error message would people see? The search results?? That's where readers go for 99.9% of the infinite search terms out there anyway. Utopes(talk / cont) 02:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep as a plausible search term. FrankAnchor 20:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete because often times you don't see the redirection header when viewing the article; hence, such incorrect redirects may cause confusion.
Bwrs (
talk) 05:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Steel1943 (
talk) 17:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
F-Bomb (documentary)
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 01:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep to be consistent with the
The F-Bomb (documentary) redirect, which the nom (correctly) fixed last week. Jay 💬 04:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"The F-Bomb (documentary)" redirect was deleted today, but I don't know why. I didn't know it was listed at RfD. When I had made the above comment, it was not. Jay 💬 07:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 02:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the target article introduces the subject as a documentary film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The F-Bomb (movie)
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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
How is NOTCENSORED an argument for the nomination or even for Delete? Jay 💬 16:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
ToadetteEdit! 17:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. No title matches exist.
Steel1943 (
talk) 02:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Fuck (2005 film) per Tavix's comments in other threads regarding the footnote at that article. An {{R from short title}} of an alternative name specified in the article, with a valid parenthetical disambiguator (the article introduces the subject as a documentary film, and - as evidenced by
our article - movie is a synonym for film). All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 12:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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:2021 Wikimedia Foundation's actions in Chinese Wikipedia
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 above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as redirect creator (though I oppose a G7 speedy). While "Jim" is a common abbreviation for the
given name "James", it does not appear to translate the same way for the surname, thus making the redirect more unnecessary than I thought when creating it in 2009. FrankAnchor 14:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. Implausible to a point where it could plausibly refer to someone else.
Steel1943 (
talk) 03:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
LeOld LeBald Le4and6
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep A variety of Le____ have been used to refer to LeBron James and nominator hasn't demonstrating any harm in this redirect existing. There are reasons other than typos for redirects existing and therefore nomination hasn't met deletion criteria. pbp 15:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Who is going to search "LeOld LeBald Le4and6" to find LeBron James? Someone just put together three random nicknames that are used to mock him, what is the point of having this?
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 20:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Mazewaxie: That "someone" is actually the editor who you're replying to, since they're the ones who created the redirect.
CycloneYoristalk! 22:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom + disparaging nickname. Not every string of three vaguely plausible nicknames deserve a redirect, and there isn't evidence for these three specifically being found together as a nickname.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 23:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, absolutely useless and beyond unlikely to use this title to reach one of the most recognized athletes of all time. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom et al. Useless nonsense.
CycloneYoristalk! 22:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete This is a quote from Jordan
[2], but it is not mentioned so the redirect is unhelpful. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep As noted above, was a quote from Jordan. Nominator seems to have nominated NBA-related redirects en masse and doesn't seem to understand redirect rules. pbp 15:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The quote is from Jordan, but is it particularly relevant to have a redirect? Also it's never mentioned in Jordan's article.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 20:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
From what I've seen so far, the nominator understands the rules perfectly well. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as an unmentioned quote. Nothing about "ceilings" nor "roofs" ever is discussed at the target page. There is no context as to what this quote is, who said it, or why it's a redirect there (or what part of the page it is pertinent to). Michael Jordan is one of the greatest athletes of all time, so anyone that wants to reach his page can easily do so through his name or the 20 other redirects that point here. Making a conscious decision to type in "the ceiling is a roof" implies that searchers are looking for a specific topic, and such a topic is not covered at the target article or anywhere on Wikipedia. Its existence misleads readers into a wild goose chase to find non-existent material. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete No mention on the page, no demonstrated relevance, not
Wikiquote.—
Bagumba (
talk) 10:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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 team
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak delete This phrase appears to come from a quote by
Sergio Ramos which is mentioned in the article. I don't think that's enough to warrant a redirect, but I could be convinced otherwise if there is evidence that this is a more common nickname. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:52, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete and definitely don't keep, as a vague and unhelpful term that would be more suitable for any other topic related to god and a team from a religious sense. Utopes(talk / cont) 08:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: whilst they have been referred to as this at least once, I imagine a bunch of other sports teams will also have been referred to as this, as the term is vague.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. It is the most common nickname for him, but dates back to the 1970s. Anyone looking for him would surely be aware of his name and just type that.
Crowsus (
talk) 14:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep If It is the most common nickname for him as Crowsus asserts, then it should be added to the article. I don't see how this would be an implausible search term in that case. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: It's a valid nickname for him. "It's from the 1970s" doesn't make it less valid as a search term.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 08:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Eleven of Hearts
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - not included in this article and the section name after the # does not even exist any more. However, there are external links which has that but since Eleven of Hearts is more than one entity
[3], it is best served as it's own article, subject to notability, excluding the Gareth Bale trademark celebration.
Iggy (
Swan) (
Contribs) 16:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Leo Di
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, unnatural and unexpected chopping of first and last name, would not be searched and would not discourage readers from finding the main page. Utopes(talk / cont) 08:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Regordinho
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer.
Mazewaxie (
talk •
contribs) 13:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Also a possibly insulting redirect: "regordinho" is
Portuñol for "very fat" (literally), which is a play on Ronaldinho (similarly pronounced).
Bedivere (
talk) 00:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: not used in media, and seems to be being used as an insult.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 16:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, "you can't see me move" is not a phrase mentioned at the target. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - I don't remember creating this but it's not a worthwhile redirect
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete this arbitrary shortname that sees no use. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Chris Ronaldo
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as the subject is not called Chris, and there is no mention of "Chris " in the target article's prose. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:51, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Rehan ronaldo
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - I have not found evidence that this is an alternative name for Cristiano Ronaldo
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 17:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per no mention of Rehan at the target article. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review).
The World's Top Goal Scorer 2011
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget to
Corey Perry. Delete, there are other sports that also have top goal scorers. --
Tavix(
talk) 19:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, Wikipedia is not Google, this is not how we do redirects. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:52, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: as ambiguous, since many sports exists and have goal scorers.
Joseph2302 (
talk) 16:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Messidona
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:CHEAP. If found via Internet search, clarifies that it refers to Messi (and not Maradona).
Homei (
talk) 20:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, was going to delete based on being an implausible and unmentioned nickname, but after Homei's explanation my deletion is stronger, as this is now also an
WP:XY situation with
Maradona, and can understandably apply to either target due to incorporating both players' names equally. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Messimagician
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete as Messimagician isn't mentioned at the target. Nobody would type this in after having already typed out "Messi", which redirects to Lionel already. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
LM19
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, no mention and no indication that this is a plausible alternative nickname of the subject, based on the content of the article. Anything can be an abbreviation, but in this format it seems unlikely. Messi is one of the most well known athletes of all time, and can be found easily. This redirect is not supported by content, as we have nothing to say about "LM19". Utopes(talk / cont) 07:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Joever
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Per
WP:SSRT. Do we really need to include such 4-chan internet slang with no encyclopedic value, a "word" not used in any articles?
Fram (
talk) 08:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 14:42, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
it's not joever til it's joever, and that entry is goated with the sauce
...apologies for whatever that was, and for the somewhat hidden pun. keep as there are sources cogsan(nag me)(stalk me) 11:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. Clearly pretty cheap and redirects are allowed to be "unencyclopedic".
Okmrman (
talk) 04:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Dr. Seuss Enterprises
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:04, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, not because of incoming links (as those don't matter if there's nothing to show for it at the target), but keep because "Enterprises" is mentioned at the article, at least in March '24. Utopes(talk / cont) 07:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Kannagi (upcoming film)
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. Yet another upcoming film redirect divides editors on whether the remaining trickle of pageviews are sufficient to merit keeping.
(non-admin closure)—
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 20:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
This film released just about 4 months ago and is no longer upcoming. Plenty of time has past to the point that there is no more confusion for a 2023 movie, as it's well into 2024 now. Nobody ending up here who sees "upcoming film" in the title would be surprised by it's removal for a movie releasing last year. Utopes(talk / cont) 17:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Very strong keep this redirect got 169 hits in the 30 days prior to this nomination, it is extremely clearly still serving a useful purpose. It's been used every single day this year, almost always more than once.
Thryduulf (
talk) 19:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Thryduulf. We shouldn't delete a redirect that is being used by readers with relative frequency. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 21:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 18:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 10:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:UFILM, the film was released more than 30 days ago. --
Tavix(
talk) 18:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: still in use, and not ambiguous with another future film that I'm aware of.
WP:UFILM states that 'upcoming film' redirects should be nominated for deletion...at least 30 days after the film receives a title or wide release, in order to allow pageviews to taper off (my emphasis) -- 30 days is a minimum, not a requirement to delete after; and the current pageviews indicate that retaining this redirect would be helpful. All the best, —a smart kitten[
meow 16:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per Thryduulf and Smart kitten. Unambiguous and useful, pageviews have tapered off but they show it is still being used well. Try after a few months. Jay 💬 19:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Phone computer
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 deletePhone computer. No consensus for
Computer phone due to the split !votes. However, due to the unusually strong opposition to disambiguation, I'm choosing to retarget to
One Per Desk as the
WP:BARTENDER. That said, perhaps a fresh discussion on that one may generate a stronger consensus for...something? --
Tavix(
talk) 02:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This seems overly technical. Nobody would really refer to smartphones as a phone computer outside of drawing some comparisons between smartphones and computers.
Okmrman (
talk) 04:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. This is what a smartphone is, and I wouldn't be surprised if the terms were used before "smartphone" became the established term (I can't check as Google is refusing to show me results that are both verbatim and before a given time, and either one alone is overwhelmed by irrelevant results where the two words happen to be adjacent, especially in lists in adverts).
Thryduulf (
talk) 18:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment shouldn't this actually link to telco equipment? Such as a PBX or other phone computers --
65.92.247.66 (
talk) 07:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. The phrasing of these redirects makes me believe they could also refer to
Modem, thus making these redirects ambiguous.
Steel1943 (
talk) 04:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I reaffirm my "delete" per Ivanvector's comment: A disambiguation page would not be the solution since none of the subjects mentioned so far are title matches. Let Wikipedia search do its job instead.
Steel1943 (
talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguilltalk 15:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. I think it is easy for English first speakers (or young people) to say they aren't needed, but they probably serve some utility and they perfectly describe what they are.
Dennis Brown -
2¢ 11:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Dabify. As Steel mentioned, a viable interpretation of this would be
Modem, being "a phone used by a computer". However, I'd also think that
VoIP phone-- a phone that uses the Internet instead of normal phone lines-- or
softphone-- a software program that could call other people, which could be downloaded and installed on a PC-- would be valid interpretations of "Phone computer" or "Computer phone". Given I'm sure none of the above- including
Smartphone (a phone which is a computer)-- would be a primary target, dabification is warranted. edited at 14:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (
talk) 12:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment continuing off of my already existing vote post: The way I see it, we have the following links to disambig between:
Modem, a device that allows a computer to access the internet using telephone lines
Smartphone, a cell phone that also has features analogous to a personal computer
VoIP phone, a phone that uses the Internet in leiu of normal phone lines
Softphone, a program allowing the use of a desktop or laptop computer to call others
Computerphone, also known as
One Per Desk, a hybrid telephone and computer sold by Sinclair QL
Someone searching these two prompts could be looking for any of the above. (Feel free to use this as the basis for a disambig page :3)
𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (
talk) 04:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - disambiguation pages are for topics that have the same title, not for manually compiled search indexes of possibly related keywords. We have a search engine for that, let it do its job.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: One more go… Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CycloneYoristalk! 09:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget Computer phone to
One Per Desk to match
Computerphone. Delete Phone computer per all as ambiguous but not suitable for a dab page. Jay 💬 18:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Disambiguate - given Jay's find of
Computerphone pointing to
One Per Desk, deletion seems undesirable as it would leave a redirect to a niche usage that is nevertheless justifiable as a search term and redirect. signed, Rosguilltalk 19:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete both; these phrases are incredibly ambiguous and not really common parlance for anything. Oppose disambiguation for the same reasons. —
TechnoSquirrel69 (
sigh) 03:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Retarget Computer phone and delete Phone computer per Jay. Computer phone should be kept since a plausible target for it exists, and due to its similarities with
Computerphone.
CycloneYoristalk! 17:53, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm happy with disambiguation or with keeping. In addition to the points made above, "phone computer" is a very plausible search term for "computerphone" from someone who has misremembered the name of the old technology.
Thryduulf (
talk) 17:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete The low page views(low utility) on both of the redirects show that it is not a common search term. Since it is vague and potentially confusing, keeping is not an option. I oppose DABbing since the potiential targets are only vaguely related to either of the terms.
Catalk to me! 00:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Vague and ambiguous. Disambiguating is not the correct solution for the reasons given by Ivanvector. TarnishedPathtalk 01:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Colonial haiti
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.
Delete. Grammatical errors. (Haiti warrants capitalization and there is currently no redirect for “Colonial Haiti”). Orphan. Serves no useful purpose. Obvious technical error in its creation. Creator is currently serving an indefinite ban.
Savvyjack23 (
talk) 02:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Not useful, only has 255 pageviews per WMFcloud since it starting counting views back in 2015.
CitationsFreak (
talk) 02:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:CHEAP. Unambigous and correctly targeted. The only error here is the lack of capitalization, which is not implausible. The correctly capitalized version should be created as well. -
Presidentmantalk ·
contribs (
Talkback) 15:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
CommentUser:Savvyjack23 the error is not an obvious one as required for CSD, and
Template:R from miscapitalizations are created as a matter of routine. That the creator was subsequently blocked or banned has no bearing on a redirects suitability as only creations made in violation of a block or ban are subject to
WP:G5, and this predates it. Please instead try to ground your concerns in
WP:RFD#DELETE, thank you.
2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC (
talk) 16:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC, you continue to misread my comments. I didn’t mention that user made this edit while being banned and in violation of it, only that his edits should be more scrutinized since his ban is indefinite. Please stop replying back with
WP:G5.Thank you.
Savvyjack23 (
talk) 16:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
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).
Side-dump condola
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. signed, Rosguilltalk 16:02, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom. Unlikely typo/misspelling.
CycloneYoristalk! 08:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
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).