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 Xorcist. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 19:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC) reply

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

Not mentioned in the target article. Dominicmgm ( talk) 13:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC) reply

This redirect used to be a stub about a level in TimeSplitters (I think this might be gamecruft, though I'm not familiar with that guideline). Also, searching onwiki for "cyberden" reveals that "Cyberden" or "The Cyberden" is (was?) a music label, founded by the same man who founded Xorcist; News search suggests that this label isn't notable. Searching Wiktionary finds nothing either. So for lack of a good target, I guess this redirect should be deleted. Duckmather ( talk) 15:20, 10 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Xorcist which is the same target as The Cyberden. Jay 💬 13:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Xorcist per Jay. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:10, 27 January 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. Removed content on the destination page was restored. (non-admin closure) ~ Eejit43 ( talk) 22:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Strongsville City Teachers' strike of 2013 → Strongsville, Ohio#Strongsville City Teachers' Strike  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

delete, the target does not contain any information about this topic. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Conditional keep - the original article about this strike was merged into the current target as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strongsville City Teachers' Strike of 2013. The relevant section was removed in two edits by IP users without discussion or edit summary [1], [2]. I have restored the relevant section. If it sticks, then I of course keep this redirect. If not, then delete. A7V2 ( talk) 00:19, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Also, either fix the incorrect section link or change the section title in the article, currently they differ but I just restored it exactly as it was before being removed. A7V2 ( talk) 00:22, 18 January 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 Lists of English cricketers#Players by era. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 18:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• List of early English cricketers to 1786 → List of English cricketers to 1771  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Inaccurate title. The target list goes up to year 1771 and does not go past that. All years after 1771 are in separate lists: See List of English cricketers to 1771#See also for the lists. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• This redirect came about from a page move. There are a handful or two of talk page links to it but that's it just now. I don't think it serves much purpose at present and I can't quite see how it would serve a purpose going forward - other than to act as a handy canary for any attempt to move the list back again by a sock. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 18:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• I'm rather surprised List of English cricketers and Lists of English cricketers are red. I'll set them up: if these links go blue you'll know I'm done. Then Redirect to Lists of English cricketers. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 18:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• @ Shhhnotsoloud: there is a template that would probably help to compile such a list: Template:Lists of English cricketers. Just in case you've not found it. Blue Square Thing ( talk) 19:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Lists of English cricketers per Shhhnotsoloud who seems to have shared my surprise at the lack of an index list. Thryduulf ( talk) 18:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget specifically to Lists of English cricketers#Players by era since that's where the two relevant articles are listed. A7V2 ( talk) 00:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Lists of English cricketers#Players by era per A7V2-it's the most feasible section to direct readers towards, since they could be searching for the current target or the list spanning 1772 to 1786. Thanks to Shhhnotsoloud for making that page! Regards, SONIC ⁶⁷⁸ 04:03, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Lists of English cricketers#Players by era As per others, seems like the most sensible option. Rugbyfan22 ( talk) 19:28, 18 January 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 soft redirect to Wiktionary. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Inceptor → TimeSplitters: Future Perfect  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

The word "inceptor" isn't unique to TimeSplitters. A quick Google search found that the term is more associated with Warhammer 40,000 than anything else. In addition, this appears to be WP:GAMECRUFT #6 (non-notable character). Dominicmgm ( talk) 13:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Disambiguate or soft redirect to Wiktionary. as an ambiguous term. wikt:inceptor means "beginner", therefore it is not specific to the game. MusiBedrock ( talk) 03:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  Also linking " Inception (disambiguation)" into the new disambiguation page here. MusiBedrock ( talk) 03:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 15:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Soft retarget to its Wiktionary entry per MusiBedrock. -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 00:37, 11 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Soft retarget to wiktionary seems most helpful. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:09, 27 January 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. Jay 💬 15:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Municipal Pictures → Mark Wahlberg  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Incorrectly PRODded by Bungle ( talk · contribs) with rationale:

Trademark associated with the actor but redirect to him offers no benefit. Not mentioned at target.

MikeAllen ( talk · contribs) also seconded this PROD. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 13:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete: As it's not mentioned at the target, it's not particularly helpful to the reader to send them to the current target. I can't find another suitable target on Wikipedia, so deletion seems appropriate. Tartar Torte 14:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: There is a Municipal clothing line by Wahlberg and year-old production company Municipal Pictures with one film. There are no secondary sources about this company and nothing at all in Wahlberg's article. I mean I guess it could be written, but with only primary sources? Just writing that it exist? Article also was created by disruptive editor that is now banned indefinitely. Mike  Allen 15:10, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. 18:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Mike  Allen 18:45, 17 January 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. The merged content has not been present at the target article since 2006, leaving no need for the preservation of this history as attribution. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Algebra/set analogy → Monoidal category  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the redirect unclear. However, this redirect was an article for about four months during 2003 and 2004; it also seems as though per the edit history of the redirect, this redirect may be a {{ R from merge}}. (But even with that possibility, the title of this redirect still seems misleading per my initial sentence.) Steel1943 ( talk) 20:02, 6 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:49, 17 January 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. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 19:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Collaborationist Ukrainian Army → Russian people's militias in Ukraine  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This was created at the same time as a recent discussion that proposed it as a new title for the target article at Talk:Russian people's militias in Ukraine#Requested move 15 November 2022. The suggestion was rejected, on the basis that no sources use the term and it suggests a link between Russian militias and the organized Ukrainian military that does not exist. Deletion for the redirect is appropriate if there are no sources that actually use this term. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Support as this is an unlikely search term. — Michael  Z. 17:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Opnion: Tend to be against. This name can better reflect the essence of these troops than the original name: 1. It is not a simple "militia". regular Russian army that participated in the war since 2014-2015; 2. By 2022, the Russian army has announced the integration of these troops into Russian army. 3. The puppet regimes have long regarded these troops as regular troops rather than militias. 罗放 ( talk) 05:13, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Support: This has nothing to do with the Ukrainian Army. — Legoless ( talk) 12:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete. I can find no evidence this term is used anywhere outside of discussions on Wikipedia. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:42, 28 January 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 Hollywood Walk of Fame. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 19:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Hollywood Chamber of Commerce → Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

I recommend deleting this redirect. The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce is a different organization from the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce. The Hollywood Chamber is likely to be worthy of an article of its own, as it is the administrator of the Hollywood Walk of Fame, but redirecting to a different chamber of commerce is just misleading to readers. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Weak retarget to Hollywood Walk of Fame (and bold it there per MOS:BOLDREDIRECT) where this are discussed to an extent, and this could be expanded a bit if the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce is not independently notable. I say "weak" as my second preference would be to delete per the nom and WP:RFD#D10. Certainly the current target isn't suitable. A7V2 ( talk) 00:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Hollywood Walk of Fame per A7V2. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:08, 27 January 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Newlands Primary School → Coburg North, Victoria#Educational facilities  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This is not mentioned at the target which isn't surprising since the school is actually in Preston, Victoria. However there are many non-notable schools with the same name (eg see List of schools in Kent, List of schools in Southampton, List of schools in Wakefield) so I think it would be best to delete to allow uninhibited search. This was an article for nearly two hours and it did have references (now dead-links and they don't look like they were all that relevant) so if others feel it is necessary to restore and send to AfD I'm not opposed to that. A7V2 ( talk) 03:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• See also a recent discussion for a similar redirect Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Hampton Primary School. A7V2 ( talk) 03:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete in favour of Search and consistent with previous RfDs. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 22:01, 17 January 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. Jay 💬 11:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Templat:PD-ineligible-USonly → Template:PD-ineligible-USonly  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Unhelpful typo redirect that is actually in mainspace. WP:RPURPOSE #12 makes the following disclaimer: consensus is that such typos, unless they are very common, should remain as red links until they are fixed.. Even though this redirect is not technically in template space, allowing for the indiscriminate creation of such redirects would be a net negative, as no one is going to accidentally transclude them. Delete. Dsuke1998AEOS ( talk) 01:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete: Using a mispelling of template as a pseudo-namespace is not particularly helpful to many. It also seems like from search this is the only page starting with "templat:", so it doesn't seem like the same convention is used to accommodate far more used templates meaning it likely would not be missed if deleted. Tartar Torte 13:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete per TartarTorte. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk) 18:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Delete: No reason to have this, I see almost no situation where this could be used. ~ Eejit43 ( talk) 02:42, 20 January 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 delete per criterion WP:G7, as executed by Maile66. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 22:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Wikipedia:Signpost/Newsroon → Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Redirect that is not in use anywhere. No incoming links except for my own userspace and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Omni-index and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Omni-index/Linkshere, two pages populated by scripts I wrote to catalog Signpost pages that have no incoming links. One of my major projects as editor-in-chief is to harmonize the use of templates and pages, as the existence of numerous redundant templates (deprecated, never used, or created at the wrong title by typos) poses a large obstacle to navigating or editing Signpost templates. For example, old Signpost articles (from 2005 to 2009) were never properly indexed by the module, because they used strange idiosyncratic header templates, which I recently fixed, allowing me to write a script which updated the module with their titles, authors and tags. Someone has requested that I list these pages at XFD individually rather than nominate them for speedy deletion. jp× g 01:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Apparently, I typo'd, then didn't realise I did. The Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom link is useful, this one, just delete. Adam Cuerden ^{( talk)}_{Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP!} 01:27, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Speedy delete since WP:G7 applies per above. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  Comment - technically I can't speedy delete this since it was already tagged WP:G6 and declined. However, I endorse deletion. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 18:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  But also courtesy ping Kusma who declined G6. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 18:33, 18 January 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 delete per criterion WP:R3. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 18:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Template:Signpost/DateCoundown → Template:Signpost/DateCountdown  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Template redirect that is not in use anywhere. No incoming links except for Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Omni-index and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Omni-index/Linkshere, two pages populated by scripts I wrote to catalog Signpost pages that have no incoming links. One of my major projects as editor-in-chief is to harmonize the use of templates and pages, as the existence of numerous redundant templates (deprecated, never used, or created at the wrong title by typos) poses a large obstacle to navigating or editing Signpost templates. For example, old Signpost articles (from 2005 to 2009) were never properly indexed by the module, because they used strange idiosyncratic header templates, which I recently fixed, allowing me to write a script which updated the module with their titles, authors and tags. Someone has requested that I list these pages at XFD individually rather than nominate them for speedy deletion. jp× g 00:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete: This was created purely due to a typo on my part; I originally created Template:Signpost/DateCountdown as Template:Signpost/DateCoundown (note the missing second 't' in "Countdown"), and had to move it to the correct name. ( Template:Signpost/DateCountdown is also currently unused, along with Template:Signpost/Days left percent, as I need to get back to them.)

The idea for those is that {{ Signpost/Deadline/core}} has been using {{ User:Bri/DateCountdown}} and {{ User:Bri/Days Left Percent}} for a bunch of its functionality. I'm looking to make changes to how those templates operate, so I inquired at User talk:Bri about whether he'd be amenable to my editing them directly, providing updated code for him to look over and apply, etc. I got no answer, so I figured the best approach would be to bring them under the Template:Signpost space and make changes there. FeRDNYC ( talk) 03:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• Delete as unused. Also, creator is fine with deletion. -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 05:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete per WP:G7. The redirect is a {{ R from move}}, but the page was moved by its creator to its current title the same day it was created, which was in November 2022. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:43, 18 January 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).