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. Consensus is that even if these redirects should typically not be purposefully created, once created, there is little point in deleting these redirects if the misspelling is plausible. -- Patar knight - ^chat/ _{contributions} 00:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Suttons Bay, Michgan → Suttons Bay, Michigan  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not a plausible search term (misspelling that is not general). Voxl ( talk) 23:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• @ Voxl: Then put a {{ Db-g7}} tag on Michgan, a redirect you literally just created less than 10 minutes ago. Otherwise, my vote is keep. Steel1943 ( talk) 00:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Michgan is defintely a generally plausible misspelling for Michigan, but this redirect is implausible due to the order of the spelling; a mistake like this isnt't applied to every mispelled English article ( Minesota to Minnesota). If this is truly the case, Duluth, Minesota should be a redirect then or Boston, Masschusetts. Voxl ( talk) 00:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Michgan is such a common search term that it should be created, as has happened. Suttons Bay, Michgan shouldn't be created, but equally shouldn't be deleted. A typo in Michigan is way more likely than for a small township in it. J947 † ^edits 00:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  If this is the case, hundreds of semi-plausible redirects should be made then for these type of misspellings to townships and cities, but I digress. Voxl ( talk) 00:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  As I said, they shouldn't be created. J947 † ^edits 00:36, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  That's why I tagged this for discussion based on accidentally finding it, then created Michgan as it is general enough misspelling. A missing "i" can go both ways for other redirects, Calfornia for example to prove this isn't a special case. There is no Los Angeles, Calfornia. I fail to see User:Steel1943's point if Michgan should be deleted then because of this RfD; they are two separate types of misspellings clauses, where Suttons Bay, Michgan isn't universally plausible due to Los Angeles, Calfornia. Voxl ( talk) 00:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  And there's no point in deleting them either. Who benefits? J947 † ^edits 00:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  My question here is plausibility, after seeing here I thought of this type of class of discussions for redirects (implausibility). The question here is does this deserve to be deleted due to implausibility? This is being unecessarily dragged out, I just want to express why I tagged this for discussion in the first place and my reasoning. Voxl ( talk) 00:50, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep, this has multiple seemingly authentic web search hits ( e.g.) so it's not implausible. No apparent ground for deletion other than implausibility. I agree that nobody should be going around creating these, but it has greater-than-zero value to a potential searcher so, having been created, it should be allowed to stand. -- Visviva ( talk) 18:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• A redirect can be in a situation where it should not be created, but once it's created, it provides some utility and there's little reason to delete except to create a precedent that these redirects should not be created. This is one of those situations. This is somewhat outlined at the NPP/Redirects essay, and a similar discussion is going on at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 19#Range of Delairea odorata. That discussion is split, and I originally made a neutral declaration there (which I have since changed to refine shortly after I made this comment); my statement about not being sure what precedent to set still stands to some extent, but I'm inclined to keep, as I think a precedent can be set that we discourage creation of these redirects without forcing them to be deleted. I imagine there's plenty more misspellings of US states in the disambiguator for a town out there, and searching for all of them, rounding them up and deleting them en masse really doesn't seem helpful – I don't see why deleting one specific one is any more helpful. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 05:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 23:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Indian scammer → Technical support scam  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

An "Indian" scammer doesn't just do technical support scams, as fraud is not one type of fraud. Should be removed or redirect elsewhere. Voxl ( talk) 23:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom, no plausible alternative. Yeeno ( talk) 08:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. There's nothing that sets apart Indian scammers from those of any other nationality; anyone can engage in numerous forms of fraud, most of which don't necessarily involve tech support. Redirecting "Scammer from [country]" to one particular type of scam is immature stereotyping. Glades12 ( talk) 09:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Certainly not a ridiculous redirect (as the article states, 85% of such scams originate in India), but could still reasonable refer to any type of scams, including the perpetrators of many notable specific instances such as the 1992 Indian stock market scam. So I think delete unless a better target exists. A7V2 ( talk) 03:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 08:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete by sending $123 to Certes Enterprises, PO Box 456, Mumbai. Anecdotally, most unknown callers with Indian accents seem to have moved on to car insurance claims, so tech support may no longer even be the main scam. Certes ( talk) 11:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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. After over a month of discussion, there isn't a clear consensus for either suggested retarget location. -- BDD ( talk) 15:55, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Manfreid → Holsteiner  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This is confusing without a mention. There's a passing reference at Frederiksborger. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Manfred along with Manfried Those are spelling variants of Manfred, and there are no current primary topic mononyms people for that spelling. I don't see any holsteiners named Manfreid; the closest would be Manfred (horse), and it's not clear if that's the intended target. AngusW🐶🐶F ( bark • sniff) 23:25, 26 May 2023 (UTC) updated 00:28, 27 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † ^edits 10:24, 3 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the talk pages of Manfred and Manfred (horse).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:43, 10 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• I haven't seen this spelling before, it looks like a typo for "Manfried". A horse with this name exists [1] and may be the most notable of all Manfreids. Anyway, weak delete, giving people the search output is likely more helpful than an unexpected redirect. — Kusma ( talk) 11:03, 10 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Frederiksborger which has a mention of the horse. Jay 💬 17:28, 17 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consideration of the late retarget suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• This is weird. It feels like it should have a reasonable target, or maybe Manfred (disambiguation) as an alternate spelling variation (except there's no items spelled Manfreid there), but it just... doesn't seem like there is a reasonable target. The passing mention in Frederiksborger is possibly targetable, but I honestly have no idea what the sentence mentioning Manfreid is even trying to say, which is not a good sign; it does seem to reference the current target of Holsteiner, so maybe adding a mention to that article is worth considering? Deletion is also acceptable here, as I'm not confident the horse is what people will be searching for when they search Manfreid. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Kusma and Skarmory, for lack of any plausible target. Even if the glancing mention in Frederiksborger were fleshed out a bit it doesn't seem likely to be what a searcher is likely to be looking for. WikiBlame confirms that Holsteiner has never contained the text "Manfreid". As to other possible targets, Manfred is about a particular literary work that doesn't appear to have ever been spelled this way, and as mentioned above Manfred (disambiguation) doesn't contain any Manfreids. Better to just let this one go IMO. -- Visviva ( talk) 03:00, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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. -- BDD ( talk) 15:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC) reply

• Lone Star Lake (Texas) → List of lakes of Texas  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

It's not currently mentioned at the list (and when it did, it was not disambiguated so it targeted the lake in Kansas). Even if Lone Star Lake were to be reädded to the list, it'd be better as a WP:REDLINK to signify there is no article on the topic. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 01:21, 27 May 2023 (UTC) reply

• Comment – mentioned at Salvinia molesta#Distribution. J947 † ^edits 01:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Lone Star, Texas ({{ R to article without mention}}). On further reflection there seem to be multiple Lone Star Lakes located in Texas. Number 1 is the one on OSM and Google Maps ( [2]) that seems remarkably unimportant. Number 2, also known as Ellison Creek Reservoir, dominates search results and seems by far the most important to include. [3], [4], [5], [6], and the Salvinia molesta mention. I think retargeting to the place is more helpful than both that and the just-readded mention at the current target as it gives the best context to the reader, and all that jazz. Search results, if the redirect is deleted, are the most unhelpful of all. J947 † ^edits 01:48, 27 May 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep I don't remember this. J947 is likely correct. I think I created this because there are a large number of them. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to Lone Star Lake (disambiguation); incomplete disambiguation. The smaller Lone Star Lake wouldn't be important to include in the list of lakes in Texas if kept as a single article (there are just over 10,000, most of them reservoirs including these two) but the list could be split by county as Montana and Arkansas and some counties of Wisconsin are, or Lone Star Lake could be included in a list in Palo Pinto County, Texas. Peter James ( talk) 23:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Yeah I'm fine with that. The dab page is way off to the database end of the spectrum, but I think for such a tough-to-search term it's reasonable. J947 † ^edits 04:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete this redirect and Lone Star Lake (disambiguation) per WP:DABMENTION. We have no meaningful content about any lakes in Texas with this name. - Eureka Lott 19:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply

  An {{ R to list entry}} would be acceptable for this, and if there's something else with the same title there should be something for that purpose - a hatnote or a disambiguation page depending on the number of entries. Any incoming links should go via the redirect, as it's easier to maintain, and if this is too ambiguous to redirect to one or the other, it can be a {{ R from incomplete disambiguation}}. An alternative would be to make the disambiguation page a set index article but this would still be useful. Peter James ( talk) 19:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC) reply

  That sounds like a perfectly reasonable course of action, until you consider the fact that neither of the Texas locations listed on the disambiguation page mention a Lone Star Lake. Retaining the redirect and disambiguation page items implies that we have information when none is present. It's misleading and confusing for readers. - Eureka Lott 23:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:52, 3 June 2023 (UTC) reply

I have removed the Texas entries from the dab. Jay 💬 06:26, 12 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per EurekaLott, and also no longer mentioned anywhere. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per EurekaLott, without prejudice to article creation. If we don't cover the topic, it's better to let redlinks do their thing. The list entry provides no information beyond "this is the name of a body of water in Texas", so having it as the target provides no value to the reader. And none of the plausible superordinate articles ( Lone Star, Texas, Big Cypress Creek) currently contain any mention of Lone Star Lake. It seems pretty clear that we should have some coverage of at least the Ellison Creek reservoir, but we don't, and pretending otherwise doesn't help anyone. -- Visviva ( talk) 03:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Salvinia molesta#Distribution (and restore dab entry) or delete. Looking at the way things currently stand, redirecting to the list does nothing more than confirm to anyone using this redirect that such a lake exists in Texas, which does not rise to the level of being redirect-worthy. I would support retargeting to the article where this lake is actually mentioned, at least anyone searching this would find some information about the lake (i.e., a fish aquatic plant that lives in it). But I would also support deletion and restoration of redlinks. Mdewman6 ( talk) 18:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 23:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Clinton socks case → Federal prosecution of Donald Trump  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This is a confusing redirect and doesn't seem to meet the criteria for WP:POFR. The only relationship this article has to "Clinton socks case" is a single paragraph about how Trump referenced the case in his public commentary. There is very little actual information here about Clinton socks case. WP:NEUTRAL and WP:NOTABLE also come into play here. The void century ( talk) 20:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete as misleading and to encourage article creation. Just because the title of Page A is mentioned at Page B, that doesn't mean A should be a redirect to B. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 21:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete I don’t believe Trump briefly mentioning this in an attempt to defend himself from prosecution is enough of a reason to keep this.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 23:49, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above: misleading. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Due to lack of context in the article and the odd wording of this redirect that sounds like a WP:NOTNEWS violation, when I first read this redirect, I thought it was a court case about socks related to Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete These are two separate notable historic incidents, and one being briefly mentioned by the other does not warrant a redirect.-- Loltardo ( talk) 02:08, 24 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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. We usually don't move redirects, but Skarmory or anyone else are welcome to create Belgrade Municipalities if they wish. (I'd create it myself, but personally don't really see the point of a title-case redirect of that nature.) -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 04:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Belgrade Мunicipalities → Subdivisions of Belgrade  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Mixed script redirect, the word Municipalities starts with a Cyrillic М instead of a latin M 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 13:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

See also Wikipedia:Request a query#Mixed script redirects. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:30, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom: extremely unlikely search term. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 19:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete because it is a mixed script redirect and therefore an extremely unlikely search term. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Move without redirect to Belgrade Municipalities to preserve edit history. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Peach in America → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Peaches in America → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• American peach → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• American peaches → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Production of peaches in America → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Production of peach in America → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• American production of peaches → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• American production of peach → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Peaches in the United States → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Peach in the United States → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• United States peaches → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• United States peach → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Production of peaches in the United States → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Production of peach in the United States → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• United States production of peaches → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• United States production of peach → Production of peaches in California  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

"California" is not equivalent to the "United States" or "America" - these redirects describe a much broader topic than the page they target. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 13:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The target doesn't have information at the level of generality that the user is expecting. Misleading. And how would California be the most likely target if somebody were to pick one state for these misleading redirects? Has the creator never heard of Georgia, "The Peach State"? Largoplazo ( talk) 22:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete someone typing in any of the terms would not be doing so to find out about California specifically.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 23:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep Read the first sentence of the target. Invasive Spices ( talk) 01:46, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  From your response to this and a number of other deletion nominations, I feel as though you see redirects as sort of a scavenger hunt for sentences. It's as though you find a sentence in an article, or you come up with a (often garbled) summation of something stated in an article, and then you imagine that Wikipedia readers have been informed that that sentence or that very specific piece of information is hidden somewhere in Wikipedia, and their job is to find it. That a reader would actually enter any of the majority of titles that have been nominated would be an extraordinary coincidence. Finally, in regard to this particular title, what does the first sentence of the article have to do with creating 16 redirect titles guaranteed to mislead users into thinking they're going to find information about peaches in the US in general? Largoplazo ( talk) 02:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Largoplazo: My comments should tell you – I see RFD as a hunt. Not redirects. Commenters here should find the redirect in the target – or not. Certainly in this case the first sentence should be read. None of the above voters read anything more than the title. This RFD demonstrates how common that is. These should not be comments in a news website – only on the headline & not the text.

  The target and the sources I have provided show that production, germplasm, pesticide research, pest research, disease research, exports are largely associated with California. Any reader from countries other than the USA is even more likely to equate the two. California is a more export oriented economy and thus supplies more foreign consumers. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  The first sentence of Adobe Photoshop is Adobe Photoshop is a raster graphics editor developed and published by Adobe Inc. for Windows and macOS. Should we redirect the term " graphics editor" to "Adobe Photoshop"?

  "Production of peaches in the United States" is a much broader topic than "Production of peaches in California" and covers a multitude of stuff not included in the target article - it is therefore not appropriate to redirect one to the other. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 02:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Not a good comparison. I would Retarget in such cases.

  In this case {{ R to subtopic}} is so common there is a RCAT. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  The first sentence of the target explicitly says that a significant part of peach production (~30%) in the USA takes place outside of California, so it in no way supports keeping since the California's peach production isn't entirely representative of the American peach production. In addition, a significant portion of the article is on the sorts of peaches that can be grown and the pests that hamper it, something that is completely different depending on the climate and ecosystem of the region: other states/territories in the country may support peach cultivars that California cannot, making them also important for peach exports. Randi🦋 ^Talk _Contribs 13:29, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Randi Moth: The target and sources I have provided show that production, germplasm, pesticide research, pest research, disease research, exports are largely associated with California. Any reader from countries other than the USA is even more likely to equate the two. California is a more export oriented economy and thus supplies more foreign consumers.

  I disagree with your interpretation of 70 & 30. 70% coming from only California is the singularly most striking statistic among USA statistics for this commodity. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete - regardless of how much peach production is in California, this is simply not the article someone searching this is looking for. Delete per WP:REDYES since this is likely a notable topic. A7V2 ( talk) 03:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete all per WP:REDLINK, considering California is not representative of America in its entirety. Steel1943 ( talk) 18:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Perceive emotional prosody → Emotional prosody  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Weird imperative sentence, we don't need a multitude of "perceive foo" redirects for every article on the site, implausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 12:35, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete Mystifying and pointless. It's like a redirect to Water titled "Drink water". Largoplazo ( talk) 15:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  No desire to create this is not the same as others may not create this and it is prohibited. Not a problematic redirect therefore WP:Redirects are cheap. – Invasive Spices ( talk) 19:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep Imperative grammar is a strange objection. Not a problematic redirect therefore WP:Redirects are cheap. – Invasive Spices ( talk) 19:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Invasive Spices: From WP:CHEAP: However, this does not mean we should pre-emptively create redirects for their own sake. Would anybody actually search in the imperative tense? Perception of emotional prosody is conceivable, but the imperative tense just seems unlikely. Shall " Perceive toad" redirect to toad, and so on? Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 22:35, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Edward-Woodrow: Scyrme objected Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 16#Add rendering rules to Graphite because imperative does sound like a search term and not {{ R with possibilities}}. Yes I am certain imperative structures are common. Among novices they are likely the most common queries because the user thinks they're talking to artificial general intelligence. — Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  

  @ Invasive Spices: Scyrme has their opinion, I have mine. I remain unconvinced. And do users think they're talking to artificial general intelligence? I think it's fairly clear that the Wikipedia search bar is a search bar for an encyclopedia, not a hypothetical intelligent agent. It even says "Search Wikipedia", not, say, "ask our AI". And it's clear that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not some AI search tool. It's even in the logo that appears on every page.

  Besides, the purpose of redirects isn't to cover every possible search term in every form. There's a search engine for that. In fact, when I search "Perceive emotional prosody", emotional prosody is the first result. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 20:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Edward-Woodrow: Very appropriate artwork. And do users think they're talking to artificial general intelligence? Unequivocally yes. Little internet use is expert use. Sit with most users and watch their internet habits. It's illustrative that most use is thru mobile phones and not computers. Besides, the purpose of redirects isn't to cover every possible search term in every form. Of course not. Invasive Spices ( talk) 20:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Well, you're wrong. The chance that even 5 people are helped by this redirect in a year is extremely minimal. So it's pointless to create. J947 † ^edits 21:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  @ Invasive Spices: The "imperative-tense-yes-or-no" debate has recurred multiple times in recent days, across multiple RfD discussions. So far, none of these discussions (or, rather, arguments?) have actually gone anywhere. I think it's time the question was raised at Wikipedia talk:Redirect or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect for some centralized discussion. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 22:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  A heavy discussion of the general question. Certainly. Invasive Spices ( talk) 16:23, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom since this is an imperative sentence that is unclear ... why is a redirect telling me what to do? Steel1943 ( talk) 16:31, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 16:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Scout talent for Hollywood → Talent agent  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Sentence fragment, implausible search term, ambiguous with Talent scouts. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 12:30, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete Another strange imperative sentence (or, now it occurs to me that these could also all be items on someone's to-do list: "Things to do today: (1) Scout talent for Hollywood, (2) Perceive emotional prosody, (3) Describe gene flows between genetically engineered species and wild relatives"); and, if it were good at all, why wouldn't it target Talent or Hollywood? Arbitrary phrase, arbitrary target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 22:37, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 22:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Jair Bolsonaro in United States during 2023 Brazilian Congress attack → 2023 Brazilian Congress attack  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Incoherent English, implausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 12:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete redirect as written doesn’t make logical sense.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 23:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: implausible search term that is not useful. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 22:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Anderson Torres in United States during 2023 Brazilian Congress attack → 2023 Brazilian Congress attack  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Incoherent, implausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 12:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 14:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete for same reasons provided at at the RFD for Jair Bolsonaro in United States during 2023 Brazilian Congress attack.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 23:57, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above: implausible search term. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Linguistically motivated abuse of Native Americans in the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Broad topic being redirected to a specific example. If this is felt to be a reasonable search term it should be retargeted somewhere more general. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 12:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The general topic referred to is hardly restricted to the realm of boarding schools. No clear target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as far too broad of a search term. An article might be writable on the topic (not a DAB per WP:DABCONCEPT, and I have no idea whether it'd have enough RS coverage hence "might"), but this redirect is unhelpful in its current state. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:49, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Yuchitown ( talk) 20:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Religiously motivated abuse of Native Americans in the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Broad topic being redirected to a specific example. If this is felt to be a reasonable search term it should be retargeted somewhere more general. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:37, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The general topic referred to is hardly restricted to the realm of boarding schools. No clear target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as far too broad of a search term. An article might be writable on the topic (not a DAB per WP:DABCONCEPT, and I have no idea whether it'd have enough RS coverage hence "might"), but this redirect is unhelpful in its current state. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:50, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Yuchitown ( talk) 20:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Religiously motivated antipathy toward Native Americans in the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Religiously motivated antipathy toward Native Americans of the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Very broad topic being redirected to a specific example. If these are felt to be reasonable search terms they should be retargeted somewhere more general. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The general topic referred to is hardly restricted to the realm of boarding schools. No clear target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as far too broad of a search term. An article might be writable on the topic (not a DAB per WP:DABCONCEPT, and I have no idea whether it'd have enough RS coverage hence "might"), but this redirect is unhelpful in its current state. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:50, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. Yuchitown ( talk) 20:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Linguistically motivated antipathy toward Native Americans in the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Linguistically motivated antipathy toward Native Americans of the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Very broad topic being redirected to a specific example. If these are felt to be reasonable search terms they should be retargeted somewhere more general. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:30, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The general topic referred to is hardly restricted to the realm of boarding schools. No clear target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as far too broad of a search term. An article might be writable on the topic (not a DAB per WP:DABCONCEPT, and I have no idea whether it'd have enough RS coverage hence "might"), but this redirect is unhelpful in its current state. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:53, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Racially motivated antipathy toward Native Americans of the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• Racially motivated antipathy toward Native Americans in the United States → American Indian boarding schools  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Very broad topic being redirected to a specific example. If these are felt to be reasonable search terms they should be retargeted somewhere more general. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:27, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete The general topic referred to is hardly restricted to the realm of boarding schools. No clear target. Largoplazo ( talk) 15:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete see response to Presidentman below as far too broad of a search term. An article might be writable on the topic (not a DAB per WP:DABCONCEPT, and I have no idea whether it'd have enough RS coverage hence "might"), but this redirect is unhelpful in its current state.

Also, would anyone object to merging this request with the above few targeting American Indian boarding schools? The !delete vote rationales have all been the same and largely by the same people, and these are pretty closely related redirects. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Skarmory I kept them separate to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK if someone managed to find a good target for some of these. Racial, religious and linguistic discrimination are three different topics, so we may find a good target for only some of them. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 22:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

That's fair, I retract my comment about merging the requests in that case. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 22:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Racism in the United States#Native Americans as the most general target. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 21:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
  • In that case, is this a reasonable search term? "Antipathy" is not a commonly used term (never used at the target), and the phrasing is also weird. I find it unlikely that this is a search term someone would actually use (though the retargeting is definitely an improvement). I'll switch my vote to a 'weak delete as such. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Yuchitown ( talk) 20:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Weapon of mass destruction maintenance → weapon of mass destruction  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Target article does not cover maintenance. Since "weapon of mass destruction" can cover all sorts of different weapons the maintenance of weapon of mass destruction does not seem like a coherent topic - what does the maintenance of atomic bombs and the maintenance of biological weapons have in common? 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete as unhelpful per nom. J947 † ^edits 11:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete there is nothing in the target article about maintenance of these types or weapons.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 00:02, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The string maintenance of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is right there. Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as unclear and unmentioned. In addition (and please pardon my bluntness and potential lack of sensitivity), but ... most "weapons of mass destruction" are weapons that explode, and well ... those weapons are not capable of being maintained after they explode. (My point is that the subject of this redirect does not have any WP:REDLINK potential since it's a nonsense subject.) Steel1943 ( talk) 16:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The string maintenance of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is right there.

This In addition… makes no sense. Consumable objects are usually maintained before they are used. Even perishable foods go through maintenance and they obviously have a much shorter shelf life. Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Calling a consumable item "maintained" makes no sense ... they are grown, created, mined, etc ... but not "maintained". Something that is maintained gets used more than once, which does not apply to consumables. Steel1943 ( talk) 14:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Comment maintenance of the U.S. nuclear arsenal Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

"arsenal" ≠ "weapon(s)"; an arsenal can consist of weapons, but a weapon is not an arsenal in any form. Steel1943 ( talk) 14:43, 23 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• United States whites as caretakers of black people → Racism in the United States#Curriculum  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]
• United States whites as caretakers of native people → Racism in the United States#Curriculum  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Incoherent, the White savior view was not restricted to education. If these were in coherent English I'd propose targeting somewhere more general, but here I would prefer deletion. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 17:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Magnus victim blaming → Joseph Maskell#Archbishop Keough High School  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Ambiguous (who is magnus? Victim blaming in what context?), "victim blaming" seems like an inappropriate way to refer to child sexual abuse, trivial detail. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete Is a victim of Magnus blaming somebody? Is Magnus blaming a victim? Is a victim blaming Magnus? Is someone blaming a victim of Magnus? Largoplazo ( talk) 22:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. Very vague. A7V2 ( talk) 03:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: implausible and extremely vague search term that serves no use. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 17:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Discussion of whether to release Kim Kardashian, Superstar → Kim Kardashian, Superstar#Release  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Target section does not mention a discussion, long unwieldy title that is unlikely to be used as a search term, mangled English contsrtuction. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 11:08, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete If this is a discussion, then every article and every section on Wikipedia is a discussion. Unnecessary and unhelpful. Largoplazo ( talk) 22:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Joyce Malecki similarity to Cathy Cesnik → Murder of Joyce Malecki#Disappearance and death  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Implausible search term, trivial detail. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. A7V2 ( talk) 03:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above: implausible search term. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep This is covered in almost all news about either. This is the reason she is the major subplot of The Keepers. Might be retargeted to Murder of Catherine Cesnik or The Keepers. Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. The redirect is not clear in what similarities it is meant to refer; it cannot be assumed that it refers to murders or disappearance. This redirect sounds like something that may be valid as a redirect on some sort of murder/disappearance-related Fandom since the context would be understood ... since the context of the redirect is not inherently understood on Wikipedia. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Joyce Malecki similar appearance to Cathy Cesnik → Murder of Joyce Malecki#Disappearance and death  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Broken English structure, the article contains a single line mention that these two people had the same build, not the same appearance, completely implausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. A7V2 ( talk) 03:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: completely implausible search term that serves no use. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep This is covered in almost all news about either. This is the reason she is the major subplot of The Keepers. Might be retargeted to Murder of Catherine Cesnik or The Keepers. Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Incoherent redirect with an incoherent subject. Steel1943 ( talk) 14:46, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 17:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Yiddish production in California → California Institute for Yiddish Culture and Language  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Incorrect English, if this is supposed to be referring to theatre work production should be plural (at the moment the redirect reads like it's discussing production of Yiddish). I also highly doubt that this single institute is a suitable target for a broad topic like Yiddish theatre in California. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 15:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete Are there many companies in California that produce Yiddish? Anyway, the title is at a more general level than one would expect to be satisfied by targeting an article about one specific organization. Largoplazo ( talk) 23:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. Very strange wording. A7V2 ( talk) 03:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Television rehearsals in the United States → Television crew  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

The target article does not cover the topic of rehearsals, "TV crew" is a completely different topic from "rehearsals". 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:18, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Article doesn't mention rehearsals more than twice and I wouldn't consider any part of the article's content to be U.S.-centric. 〜 Askarion ✉ 14:59, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete Misleading and arbitrary. Why would this target a crew article? Not the actors? Not the studios? All of them would be equally off-point and unhelpful. None of them would be helpful. And what's with the implication that the target is specifically about the United States? Largoplazo ( talk) 22:50, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete due to lack of content. Note that the singular Television rehearsal in the United States was created by the same user and targets simply Rehearsal, in addition to a handful of similar redirects, which mentions neither television or the United States. I will nominate those separately. Mdewman6 ( talk) 23:28, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Askarion Largoplazo The target is US specific. Look at the sections. It's really more specific than that — blue screen is becoming popular means this was written in a particular place & time & hasn't been updated since then. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:13, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  I've been reading your responses in good faith to see if you might say anything convincing. The article (along with its section titles) is about such roles as makeup artists and costume designers and technical directors. These are the same worldwide. The only mentions of the US are a very few scattered comments about alternative terms. Rehearsals are mentioned in passing twice in the article, without providing any information about them. There is nothing about rehearsals in the United States. Sorry, but I'm done wasting my time. Please stop pinging me. Largoplazo ( talk) 19:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Steel1943 ( talk) 14:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 16:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• SIL International gathering data → SIL International#Methodological contributions  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Another "company name + verb" type redirect, not a plausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete About as helpful as "SIL International serving employees lunch in the office cafeteria". Unclear that somebody who would type "gathering data", if there is such a person, would be interested in the methodology rather than the data. Largoplazo ( talk) 22:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete as confusing at best -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 13:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 16:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• American films are extremely popular around the world → Americanization#Media and popular culture  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Random sentence from the target section, not a plausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom: unlikely search term, and opens up a WP:PANDORA of redirect possibilities (e.g., Tea is a popular drink in Turkey redirecting to Tea in Turkey, and so on). Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 15:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 13:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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 by nominator. Per [7] 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 14:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Manny Súarez → Manny Suárez  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Delete this redirect as an obvious placement of the Spanish stress diacritic on the wrong syllable. Santiago Claudio ( talk) 10:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep per K4: deletion likely to cause problems as this was a long-standing previous article title. J947 † ^edits 11:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep Yes, we even have a whole class of redirects from typos, to which I've just added this one. It was already categorized as a redirect-from-move, which means someone had put the article under this title and it got moved to the correct one. So it's appropriate for this title to remain as a redirect. Largoplazo ( talk) 12:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 17:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Describe gene flows between genetically engineered species and wild relatives → Genetic pollution#top  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Weird redirect phrased like an essay prompt. Too long to be a plausible search term, we should not create "describe foo" redirects for every article on the site. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom: unlikely search term, reads like a prompt for generative AI or an essay. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 15:18, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: a weirdly phrased sentence that is also an implausible search terms and serves no use to the reader. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Develop methodology in ethnomusicology → Ethnomusicology#Theories and methods  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Another "develop foo" type redirect. Strange structure and wording, not a plausible search term. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 12:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. A7V2 ( talk) 03:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom, and this redirect is telling me what to do for some reason. Steel1943 ( talk) 14:41, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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 American Brazilians. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 04:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• White American emigration to Brazil → immigration to Brazil  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This redirect is self contradictory - you cannot emigrate to a country because emigration is the act of leaving. Why would someone searching for emigration want to be redirected to the article on immigration, which is the opposite? Also this is weirdly specific with it's "White American" qualifier, "White American" is mentioned only once briefly in the target. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete since there is very little mention of whites in the target article this isn’t needed. Also, even if it was, it should be at White American immigration to Brazil not White American emigration to Brazil.-- 65.93.193.94 ( talk) 00:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to American Brazilians as {{ R from subtopic}}. The assertion that you cannot emigrate to a country is spurious, or perhaps a WP:ENGVAR issue; see Google Ngrams [8]. 59.149.117.119 ( talk) 11:52, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Weak Retarget to American Brazilians where this is somewhat discussed. Wording is a bit awkward though. A7V2 ( talk) 03:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Weak retarget to American Brazilians as an {{ R from subtopic}}. I support retargeting over deletion due to WP:CHEAP but am not completely opposed to it. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to American Brazilians per IP. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 21:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 04:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Other potential CFA states → Compact of Free Association#Other potential CFA states  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Makes no sense as a standalone redirect. "Other foo" doesn't make sense without having read the rest of the article as it's a comparison. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 10:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete "Other" with respect to what? "Other" is in the target article in the context of states that were covered before the section with "other ... states" in its title. Unless a reader has already read the article, what would they have in mind by "other", and, if anybody would search for such a thing, why would the states with respect to which they have "other" states in mind be the same ones as in the article? Largoplazo ( talk) 22:55, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep Standard {{ R to section}} and {{ R from subtopic}}. Especially for piping. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Since the phrase is not a term for any entity, the redirect fails to answer the question "Other than what?" ... and is the reason close to all redirects with the same issue have been deleted over the past decade. (Also, {{ R from subtopic}} is erroneous; the creator literally just took a title of a section that didn't represent anything specific and claimed it to be a subtopic ... that is not valid at all.) Steel1943 ( talk) 14:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Eastern-European Jewish passing as indigenous American → Passing (racial identity)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

More specific version of Jewish passing as indigenous American, currently heading towards deletion. Same issues apply with this redirect - not discussed in the target article, not a notable example of passing, ungrammatical construction. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 09:57, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 11:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom: too many qualifiers to be an unlikely search term. Once again, a WP:PANDORA of redirects: shall we also have " Irreligious North Indian passing as American" and so on? Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 15:22, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

@ Edward-Woodrow: Unlike that this is discussed in the target. The nominator is incorrect. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

You are correct that an example of this specific scenario is in fact discussed at the target. But should every example on every page have a corresponding redirect? Does this redirect meet the purposes set out at WP:RPURPOSE? I believe not. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 20:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• This is discussed in the target. I suggest reading the target. Invasive Spices ( talk) 18:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Imagine there wasn't already an article on American Jews and someone created a redirect with that title and targeted Woody Allen. That's about what this is like. Largoplazo ( talk) 20:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 14:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Noam Chomsky's worldwide audience → Political positions of Noam Chomsky#Worldwide audience  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Nonsenical, ambiguous. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 09:53, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 09:56, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Nonsense search term, given the vagueness of "audience" and the fact that the redirect claims that "audience" is exclusive to "political positions", which makes no sense. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:19, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was SNOW delete. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 17:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• SIL International develops fonts → SIL International#Fonts  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Another "Company name + verb describing what the company does" type redirect. Implausible search term, bizarre structure. 192.76.8.65 ( talk) 09:49, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 09:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom: bizarre structure, very unlikely search term. SIL International fonts is conceivable though; could that be created? Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 15:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: unlikely and implausible search term. I do not oppose the creation of SIL International Fonts per Edward-Woodrow. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 06:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Rhea Seehorn-Larson → Rhea Seehorn  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Joseph Allen Schreibvogel-Maldonado → Joe Exotic  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Joseph Allen Maldonado-Schreibvogel → Joe Exotic  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Leah Vitale-Wolff → Leah Penniman  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Debby Ryan-Dun → Debby Ryan  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Vanessa Kishino → Vanessa Marshall  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Betsy Rue-Reynolds → Betsy Rue  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Valorie Curry-Underwood → Valorie Curry  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Pat Musick-Whitman → Pat Musick  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Anna Gunn-Duncan → Anna Gunn  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Tress Payne-MacNeille → Tress MacNeille  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Catherine O'Hara-Welch → Catherine O'Hara  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Kim Rhodes-Hodges → Kim Rhodes  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Anna Faris-Barrett → Anna Faris  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Milo Manheim-Brezovar → Milo Manheim  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Milo Brezovar → Milo Manheim  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Kristen Hager-Jones → Kristen Hager  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Tamara Scallon → Nostalgia Critic  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Tamara Lynn Scallon → Nostalgia Critic  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Tamara Chambers-Scallon → Nostalgia Critic  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Vera Hargitay → Jayne Mansfield  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Vera Cimber → Jayne Mansfield  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Jayne Cimber → Jayne Mansfield  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Jessica Hecht-Bernstein → Jessica Hecht  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Kimberly Wexler-Goodman → Kim Wexler  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Ingrid Michaelson-Laswell → Ingrid Michaelson  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Angela Kinsey-Lieberstein → Angela Kinsey  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Angela Kinsey-Snyder → Angela Kinsey  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Jo Frost-Jackson → Jo Frost  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Amanda Stott-Young → Amanda Stott  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Grace Helbig-Morgan → Grace Helbig  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Deborah Seehorn-Larson → Rhea Seehorn  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Precedent set at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 17#Married name redirects with 0 hits. All of these are married name redirects with zero google hits once put into "quotation marks", or if they have google hits, they are circular hits, due to search engine errors, or referring to a different person entirely. I recommend deletion.

There are additional redirects, but due to various reasons, I have limited this nomination to just these redirects. I would recommend not bundling an additional redirect unless you can prove it has zero uses. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:42, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete all per nom; unhelpful and potential for BLP complaints. J947 † ^edits 09:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

I completely forgot I included two non-married name redirects at some point, namely Milo Brezovar and Milo Manheim-Brezovar. These still have 0 hits, but it's worth clarifying they're not married name redirects. (The rest are.) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Something like this can be justified if there's actually reliably sourced evidence of the hyphenated name actually being in some use (e.g. Priyanka Chopra Jonas), but it is not a thing that every married woman automatically needs to have if there isn't any evidence of her ever actually being referred to by a hyphenated name in the real world. Bearcat ( talk) 14:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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. While there's some disagreement as to whether this is a commonly-used phrase, a counterpoint to the argument that the current target is the clear primary topic has not been successfully made. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• According to John → Gospel of John  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Very vague, so I propose deletion. Veverve ( talk) 07:06, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep - not vague at all: this is the name of the book (kata Ioannen). St Anselm ( talk) 13:09, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  The book is called "The Gospel According to John". Nobody calls it "According to John", they say the full name, "Gospel of John", or "John". QuicoleJR ( talk) 17:45, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  Well, there is this book. It is, after all, the literal translation of the Greek title. St Anselm ( talk) 18:50, 14 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  But there's no mention of that book in the article! Largoplazo ( talk) 12:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  There doesn't have to be. St Anselm ( talk) 13:47, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  There does have to be if the reason given to justify the redirect is that there's something by that name related to the target. If a redirect to an article about a writer has a title that's the name of an essay that that writer wrote, but the article about the writer mentions that essay nowhere, the redirect would be deleted. We aren't supposed to have redirects that take readers places with no information about what they were looking for. Largoplazo ( talk) 14:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

  No, the point is that the target is known by that name. St Anselm ( talk) 14:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete My reasoning is in my reply to StAnselm. QuicoleJR ( talk) 17:45, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/ _{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 06:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Weak keep. Mentioned in the target article (albeit, somewhat surprisingly to me, in a footnote). Web search strongly suggests that the gospel is the primary topic. The user value seems minimal, but this isn't totally implausible as a search term if someone didn't know what "the Gospel according to John" refers to. (And although "according to John" could theoretically refer to almost anything, it doesn't seem likely that this would get in the way of any foreseeable searches.) -- Visviva ( talk) 03:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep as a valid translation and somewhat plausible search term. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 19:40, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Tamzin and StAnselm. Edward-Woodrow :) _{[ talk} 20:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 06:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• 2023–24 FC Emmen season → FC Emmen  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Red link to encourage page creation. The redirect was created back in March, way too prematurely. Dl.thinker ( talk) 05:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom as presently unhelpful, or second choice retarget to 2023–24 Eredivisie. J947 † ^edits 05:09, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the above. A7V2 ( talk) 03:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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 speedy retarget to Geography of Middle-earth#Minhiriath. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) J947 † ^edits 03:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Minhiriath → Middle-earth#Geography  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This term is not mentioned in the target article ( Middle-earth). Ping User:Chiswick Chap in case he can figure out what to do that will not involve deletion. PS. This used to be a poor article before it was boldly redirected, I doubt it meets WP:GNG. But maybe it can be mentioned in some overview, like the Geography of Middle-earth? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Updated to point to Geography of Middle-earth#Minhiriath, where it is described. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:09, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Nom withdrawn per above. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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 disambiguate. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she|they|xe) 03:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Hevel → Cain and Abel  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target; per Abel (given name), is related. Note Hector Hevel, Johannes Hevel. Disambiguate? J947 † ^edits 03:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Keep. "Heḇel" is mentioned, which is the same thing. St Anselm ( talk) 04:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply
  • So hatnote to a Hevel (surname)? J947 † ^edits 04:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

If I recall correctly, I was involved in the redirect's creation. I currently have no opinion on this matter, and I respect whatever consensus is reached. - Gilgamesh ( talk) 07:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Disambiguate with Abel, Hector, Johannes Hevel, Jules Vanhevel/ Jules Van Hevel and wiktionary -- 64.229.90.172 ( talk) 03:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• On second thoughts disambiguate. The word is mentioned in the lead of the Ecclesiastes article as well. St Anselm ( talk) 15:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 06:29, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Hexahectaenneacontakaiheptagon → Colorado  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This WP:NEOLOGISM was introduced to the encyclopedia a few days ago. The talk page lists some media mentions of the term, but they all lead back to a 2018 item from bigthink.com which asserts that the state has 697 sides. Should this be deleted under WP:RFD#D8 as an obscure synonym? - Eureka Lott 22:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete Unlikely search term not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR ( talk) 00:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep - nickname with notable and sustained WP:RS coverage and fits the sourcing requirements listed at the aforementioned WP:NEO. Side note, I as the creator of the redirect wasn't alerted of this discussion. - Knightoftheswords281 ( Talk · Contribs) 05:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:27, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom and QuicoleJR. A reader hoping to find information about what this word means is going to find nothing informative at Colorado. D8 seems very much on point. (Alternatively, a soft redirect to Wiktionary might also be a good outcome here.) -- Visviva ( talk) 03:35, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RFD#D8: obscure search term that does not serve any use. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

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 List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue. Consensus is that a redirect here is sufficiently helpful, especially with a sortable table. -- Patar knight - ^chat/ _{contributions} 21:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• List of largest automotive companies by revenue → List of largest companies by revenue  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This redirect is completely different from the article it links to. Plus, we already have the article List of manufacturers by motor vehicle production. I think this redirect should be deleted. rayukk | talk 09:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply

• List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue might be a better fit for this redirect? Also note that the current state of affairs is the result of an AFD discussion [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest automotive companies by revenue] 192.76.8.86 ( talk) 19:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:55, 5 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom, and since the scope of List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue is not as precise as the scope of the nominated redirect, meaning readers searching the redirect should be expecting to find the results specifically stated in the redirect. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:14, 6 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete since the scope of the redirect is a lot narrower than the scope of the target. Hut 8.5 17:06, 13 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• I agree with the AfD outcome, and so disagree with this RfD nomination. But I find IP192's suggested target of List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue better, for the same reasons as the AfD nomination - the Industry field is sortable, and is just one click away. Jay 💬 08:36, 15 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue per Jay. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:26, 17 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue per Jay. Not sure if this is actually of any plausible value to anyone but it's been around for a while and it isn't in the way, so we might as well just keep it around with the best available target. -- Visviva ( talk) 03:26, 19 June 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to List of largest manufacturing companies by revenue per Jay. Redirects are WP:CHEAP, so I prefer retargeting over deletion. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).