The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Cat health#Toxic substances. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Cat poison → Cat#Poisoning  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

There's no content about cat poisons in the article, and very little about toxicity of foods to cats in either this article or Cat food. There's a couple sentence stub in the article history, but I doubt it would survive AFD in its current form, so I think this can just be deleted, because I don't see a good retargeting option that I can think of. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:40, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Could potentially redirect to Cat health#Toxic substances Traumnovelle ( talk) 22:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Okay, I just missed that. Redirect to Cat health#Toxic substances. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 22:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Retarget as per Traumnovelle and Skarmory. Anyone looking for what might be poisonous to cats via searching "cat poison" would be well served by this new target. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( talk) 09:06, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Retarget per above, straightforward retarget. Ca ^{talk to me!} 05:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Retarget per the above. Glades12 ( talk) 06:31, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Comment The target is obvious as above, but I just want to raise the point that it's possible this redirect is unethical. Someone searching this specific phrase is likely looking for the analog to "rat poison", as in, a substance to deliberately put out to kill cats... and it sits wrong with me that we would so quickly provide that information. I know, I know, wikipedia is not censored... just want to raise the concern here. Fieari ( talk) 23:47, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Cat health#Toxic substances per above. Fieari's concern is appreciated although my GSearch seems to show that this term's result is mostly about what to do if you suspect you're cat has been poisoned. -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 06:51, 18 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).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 06:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Pkiro Wrokestling → Professional wrestling  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This title is not a plausible error for "professional wrestling", to put it mildly. My searches for "Pkiro Wrokestling" didn't turn up any meaningful results, though weirdly a Facebook account mentions it.

However, it would appear that this redirect has "non-trivial page history". Its original content is identical to a past version of the main article ( 01:06, 12 April 2008). My guess is that the user who created it was upset that their "professional wrestling is fake" version of the article had been reverted and decided to surreptitiously create a fork by messing up with the title. Anyway, while I agree that pro wrestling is not a genuine sport, delete this redirect for being patently implausible and for not having page history worth preserving. Dsuke1998AEOS ( talk) 18:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. Any substantial page history it has is, as noted, already preserved in the history of Professional wrestling. It's not a genuine sport because it's a theatre performance. Full-contact, no-holds barred, theatre. Calling it fake is like going to a stage play and calling Macbeth fake, like yeah, it is, but is that really the point?? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( talk) 19:46, 14 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).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Withdrawn. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Stone Temple Pilots (1994 album) → Purple (Stone Temple Pilots album)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Unlikely search term, I can't find any evidence that the album is referred to this way anywhere. Does not appear to be a useful redirect. JeffSpaceman ( talk) 17:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Per the article On analogue formats (LP and cassette) of the original release, the album title is shown as simply Stone Temple Pilots on the tape shells and LP labels. (emphasis in original). Given there are also apparently 2010 and 2018 albums called Stone Temple Piliots the 1994 disambiguator is highly plausible for an album released in 1994. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

  I stand corrected, I withdraw my nomination. Sorry for any time wasted here. JeffSpaceman ( talk) 17:31, 14 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).

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. Jay 💬 17:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Football at the 2016 Summer Olympics – Women's CAF qualification → 2015 CAF Women's Olympic qualifying tournament  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

I call for a deletion of this title as it isn't/wasn't its proper name for it. Created by now-inactive user who was at first unsure about a proper titling of this article. Intrisit ( talk) 15:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• If this is unambiguous it seems harmless. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. -- BDD ( talk) 18:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep - the redirect is in a standard form and therefore likely searchable. Giant Snowman 18:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep per GiantSnowman's response. —  Jkudlick ⚓  (talk) 20:35, 15 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).