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.
After the previous discussion of this redirect, I think I’ve found a way better target, it’s
10 (Southern Cross Austereo)#2016–2021: Nine affiliation, which talks about
Southern Cross Austereo’s stations during their affiliation with the
Nine Network. The Adelaide station NWS (the current target) was never referred to as Southern Cross Nine under its previous
Southern Cross Broadcasting ownership, redirecting to NWS would be confusing and inaccurate. This redirect is not mentioned in the target article except in a hatnote.
Bassie f (
talk) 21:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Done.
A7V2 (
talk) 22:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Support per nom. Seems like the best target, certainly better than the current one. Pinging @
Nick Mitchell 98: who was the other participant in the previous discussion, and looks to have advocated for this target anyway.
A7V2 (
talk) 22:19, 2 December 2022 (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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 17:19, 9 December 2022 (UTC)reply
This redirect created back in 2006 (not as the result of a move) lacks a space between the disambiguator's words, so I'm not sure this is really plausible. The correctly spaced 24 (television series), though it's the result of a move in the same year, is worth keeping as "television series" is a plausible alternative term, plus it gets tons more pageviews per year than the nominated redirect. Delete the nominated one unless someone can provide a justification or alternative course of action. Regards,
SONIC678 16:15, 2 December 2022 (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).
Vampire Academy (fil,)
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 17:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)reply
I get it, the , key is next to the M key on a QWERTY keyboard, and this is a leftover from a move in 2014 to Vampire Academy (movie) (which was then moved to the target's present title over 23 hours later), but I'm not entirely sure this redirect is plausible because of the typo in the disambiguator. I thought I'd bring it over to RfD to discuss. Regards,
SONIC678 16:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete: I can understand how the typo happened, but it's not a common typo. Is arguably a
WP:G6 per {{db-error}}, but no need to speedy where it's only marginally a
WP:G6.
TartarTorte 20:42, 2 December 2022 (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 since a mention was added at the target, addressing the initial concerns of the nom; and there was no further discussion for finding a new target.
(non-admin closure)CycloneYoristalk! 08:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Courtesy ping to see if
Mx. Granger wants to withdraw. Jay 💬 14:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)reply
Comment: I think this could be kept open as a discussion. I don't think that
Glenn Ellison is an inherently more of an appropriate target for her as an {{R from spouse}} vs. {{R from relative}} than
Caroline Ellison, especially if a similar mention is added to about being her mother is added Caroline's article as was added to Glenn's with regards to being his wife.
TartarTorte 15:51, 25 November 2022 (UTC)reply
I think redirecting to Glenn Ellison's article makes more sense. There's going to be more overlap in content between two academic economists of the same generation who've collaborated than between an academic economist and a cryptocurrency trader.
Blythwood (
talk) 23:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)reply
Blythwood, thank you for adding the mention to the article. I'm not sure which of these targets makes sense, if either. Do we usually redirect non-notable, low-profile family members of an article's subject? It seems most of the pages that use
Template:R from spouse are for higher-profile spouses. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 10:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Retarget to husband or daughter? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:16, 2 December 2022 (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 03:41, 9 December 2022 (UTC)reply
While it's possible that she was mentioned in
Rudy_Giuliani#Personal_life when this redirect was created (2009) and subsequently revised (2012), that's no longer the case. While there is sourcing that could make a case for this redirect, it's the Daily Mail and other sources entirely inappropriate for a BLP who (may) be otherwise notable. Red link would encourage source assessment and possible article creation. StarMississippi 03:23, 2 December 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete Not mentioned at
Rudy Giuliani nor does she necessarily need to be. I see a little sourcing out there, but if there is a page to write, it can be drafted from a red link. –
Muboshgu (
talk) 03:47, 2 December 2022 (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).