From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< February 8
February 10 >

February 9

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 9, 2024.

Johto water dragon

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 23:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Kingdra is never referred to as "Johto water dragon" at the target, making this an unlikely description and not a redirect that needs to be maintained. Utopes ( talk / cont) 22:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • delete for the same reason as "dialga the temportal pokemon". that's at best an issue for bulbapedia cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete because why not Gyarados? Steel1943 ( talk) 23:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    it's not from johto, or a dragon-type cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    It didn't originate in gen 2, but it is in gen 2. And don't get me started on the "It's not a dragon if it's not dragon-type" argument; example: Charizard. Steel1943 ( talk) 18:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    the pokémon(?) described as being "like if a dragon banged a robot idfk" isn't dragon or steel type, so anything goes, really cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Also if my memory serves me, Dratini can also be fished off the waters of Johto. -- Lenticel ( talk) 03:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Notched-Ear Pichu

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 23:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirected after a 2009 AfD here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notched-Ear Pichu. "Notch" not mentioned at the target, making this an unlikely and unhelpful search term. Utopes ( talk / cont) 22:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

delete. it's not even the right name. that one pichu that's stuck in gen 4 is called "spiky-eared pichu" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Contact Center as a Service

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 23:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Alternate capitalization of two pages, Contact Center as a service, and Contact center as a service, the latter being a copy-paste of the former without attribution. The former was retargeted to the latter and deleted as G8, but this capitalization variant is still floating, and no longer discussed at the target. Utopes ( talk / cont) 20:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - should have been deleted along with the original target. A7V2 ( talk) 23:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep because it's not a "novel or very obscure synonym", which is the criteria under WP:RFD#DELETE for unmentioned names. It might be better pointed specifically at the Call centre#Virtual call centre section, but I don't think that's critical. The capitalization (which wouldn't be a reason to delete a redirect anyway) is appropriate, because the abbreviation is CCaaS, to mirror SaaS. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 00:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 06:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom. Gjs238 ( talk) 20:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Canidae in Manipuri culture

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. The AfD for the target Canidae in Meitei culture closed as merge to Meitei culture#Animals and birds, but the merge has not yet been done. The redirects may be looked afresh after the merge. Jay 💬 05:57, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Ridiculous number of redirects for this article. This seems like an unlikely case for a redirect. PepperBeast (talk) 20:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note I've bundled these redirects that all had an identical rationale. Thryduulf ( talk) 20:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Having a lot of redirects to an article is absolutely not a problem in and of itself. Also note that the current target is nominated for detion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canidae in Meitei culture. As for what to do with these, I am neutral on the first few and the last one (ending "in Manipuri culture") as I think they would be fine if they ended "in Meitei culture" but I don't understand the context enough to know if this is equivalent, noting that Manipuri culture is a dab page. Keep Vixen in Meitei culture (discussed at target), Keep Canid in Meitei culture. Delete the rest (those beggining with "domestic dogs" and "hunting dogs") as there isn't really any discussion at the target about these. A7V2 ( talk) 23:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Having a lot of redirects to an article is absolutely not a problem in and of itself It is when the author is very clearly just spamming redirects. The article itself should not even exist, never mind the ten thousand redirects. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 09:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete, incredible there even needs to be a discussion about this. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 09:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Policy based rationale? Because this is textbook WP:IDONTLIKEIT. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 17:18, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
WP:COMMONSENSE. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Yeah? Okay, how does deleting these make sense? You have to have some reason, even if it isn't based on policy. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 21:14, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep all: Regardless of how the AfD turns out, these are possibly useful redirects that can be targeted to the merged section if the target is closed as merge/redirect. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep all : Those terms are English language synonymous terms of the important topics mentioned and discussed inside the article in varying degrees. For example, canidae, caninae, canids, canines, etc. are all scientifically as well as terminologically directly related as well as derivatives of one another. Those are zoological terms for the group of animals that consists of wolves, jackals and dogs. Vixen isn't an irrelevant term but a feminine gender of fox. Deletion isn't the solution. -- Haoreima ( talk) 00:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Strong keep all, incredible there even needs to be a discussion about this. Subtopics of the main article clearly acceptable under WP:RPURPOSE. Can likely still be useful regardless of the AfD result per Hey man im Josh. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 21:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Hui (animal)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 20#Hui (animal)

Vixen in Manipuri culture

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. The AfD for the target Canidae in Meitei culture closed as merge to Meitei culture#Animals and birds, but the merge has not yet been done. The redirects may be looked afresh after the merge. Jay 💬 06:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Ridiculous number of redirects for this article. PepperBeast (talk) 19:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Pepperbeast: Could you please bundle these redirects since they're all pointed to the same location? Also, please be aware, "ridiculous number of redirects" is not a valid deletion rationale. Hey man im josh ( talk) 20:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Note. I've bundled these redirects to the same target with a near-identical nomination statement. Thryduulf ( talk) 20:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep all, helpful, discussed at target, nominator provides zero rationale for deletion. We have a ridiculous number of articles on Wikipedia. Let's delete some of them, I don't care if they're useful. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 02:01, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Target does not mention wolf or wolves except as an item in a word list. Canis, caninae, and vixen seem like unlikely article searches. PepperBeast (talk) 13:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Are you serious? Not only should the redirects be deleted, but so too should the article they point too. This is just mind numbingly jobless behavior from some Manipuri nationalist. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 09:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Brusquedandelion and Pepperbeast: These are all discussed at the target, they are subtopics of "Canidae." Wolves, jackals, foxes, and Caninae are all canids. Obviously if the AfD returns a "delete" result then these should be deleted as broken redirects, but otherwise they are useful. So far neither of you have given any rationale for deleting these apart from WP:IDONTLIKEIT statements that make this nomination unhelpful and borderline-disruptive. Brusquedandelion, you call these redirects "spam", which makes no sense because they are discussed to varying degrees at the target, and you say that this is mind numbingly jobless behavior from some Manipuri nationalist, which is pretty much a WP:PA against Haoreima. I encourage you to strike that part of your comment.
Deleting these redirects would be a net decrease in the quality of the encyclopedia, and you still can't come up with policy-backed rationales for deleting them. WP:RPURPOSE clearly list Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 17:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Claiming the redirect should exist simply because they are discussed at the target is irrelevant given the target itself should not exist. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 20:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Then take that up at the deletion discussion. This is not a discussion about the article, this a discussion about these redirects on their independent merits. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 21:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
But why? WP:COMMONSENSE suggests that I should absolutely use all information available to me in trying to make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 01:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Like you realize ANYONE can edit a Wikipedia article, right? Are you telling me if I follow this simple, two-step procedure, I can manufacture whichever redirects I wish?
  1. Edit the destination article to introduce whichever topic I wish.
  2. Manufacture a new redirect from the topic I introduced to the destination article.
I confess I am new to this site. But if you're sincerely telling me that Wikipedia has no safeguards against such a simple tactic- against this and others sorts of, well, frankly, jobless behavior by people with nothing better to do (let's call a spade a spade), how do Wikipedia admins get anything done at all? How are you not constantly just dealing with a river of mind-numbingly dull minutia?
Surely there's some safeguard against this. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 21:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Yes, we do have policies on what sort of thing should be listed in articles, otherwise they would be, as you note, piles of minutiae and tangents. WP:DUE is one of the most salient, along with WP:TRIVIA and WP:SUMMARY 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 21:32, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete all, and take actions against the user spamming these redirects. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 09:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Why do you believe these should be deleted? Thryduulf ( talk) 20:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Do you think there should be Wikipedia pages for X in Y culture, where X is any word for a species of animal, and Y is any culture? Obviously not. Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
If there is content about that species in that culture, it is likely a useful redirect. If there isn't it is likely not. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep all: Possibly useful. Not really seeing a problem with them. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    How are they useful? Brusquedandelion ( talk) 03:45, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    This is because foxes, jackals, and wolves are separate species from dogs. Though perhaps unlikely to be thought of first, a specialist might be specifically interested in the role of foxes in this culture, and look that up specifically. If we do have significant writing on this topic, a redirect is helpful. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 10:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Because this is what redirects are for. Read WP:REDIRECT. Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 21:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep all: Those are all directly relevant terms, which are discussed in the article at varying degrees, not random spams. Haoreima ( talk) 00:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • These would all be retargeted to Animals in Meitei culture#Dogs in Meitei culture once the current merge discussion as concluded. Currently, many of the animals in these redirects aren't mentioned there yet (wolves, foxes), so it's hard for me to tell what it will look like after the merge. I expect a Complete keep would be fine here, though specific animals may end up omitted. "Vixen" should be omitted unless female foxes are explicitly mentioned in the article. I think we have to wait and see for the end result. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 10:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Midnight Miracle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 26#Midnight Miracle

Penguin pokemon

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 article in the history could have been speedied as A10. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC) reply

adding here again, because i believe it's an implausible search, and also redundant because eiscue exists cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Dexerto

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 💬 17:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

current target is to an employee--not the founder or EIC, just an editor at large. Dexerto is only barely mentioned on the page. Alyo ( chat· edits) 16:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: As author, I made this redirect, given the article was previously deleted, to fill the red links left behind. There is a draft at Draft:Dexerto that can be worked on to eventually take over from this redirect, and no other article in the mainspace presently refers to Dexerto outside of it being used as a source, which is cited in a multitude of articles. WP:Redirects are cheap, and it is better to provide a link for our readers than not to. Trailblazer101 ( talk) 17:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Wouldn't it be better to leave Dexerto as a red link if there's a draft? Otherwise, moving the draft to the correct title would be more complicated. Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 18:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Trailblazer101, my issue is that the redirect, while cheap, isn't actually accurate, and attaches more importance to the Lewis-Dexerto relationship than is true. If there were another target, I'd entirely support retargeting instead. Alyo ( chat· edits) 19:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Soft delete: I only suggest deleting redirects if I believe the redirect will cause more confusion than the value it brings. It seems clear to me Lewis is not the proper page to redirect to, it has only been chosen because there is no better article (e.g. a founder or parent company). Mokadoshi ( talk) 17:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete It's not notable, not everything requires a redirect. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 19:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Dexerto may frequently be used as a citation on Wikipedia, and users may click that wikilink to find out more about the publication. Getting directed to a journalist with only limited involvement in the publication (and thus, source article) would be very confusing within that context. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 09:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - I was looking to create an article about Dexerto/expanding Draft:Dexerto, a well-known publication. Makes 0 sense to be directed to a journalist.
TLA (talk) 02:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Lati@s

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. Cited as plausible search term. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy 17:54, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Unlikely search term. From some searching, it seems like it may be based on a meme about Latios and Latias, each one having a different gender, and "Lati@s" apparently being a play on that. Even if that weren't the case, I'd nominate this as a l33tspeak redirect that's unehlpful. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

it's mostly used in forums like gamefaqs to refer to them. otherwise, most people refer to them as the "eon duo" or forget that latias exists. support deletion cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
I created it because it's a common nickname used by fans to refer to Latios and Latias collectively. Put me down for keep. Raymond1922 ( talk) 18:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Raymond1922A: Then it becomes an issue of if there are multiple relevant targets, which one should be targeted? Hey man im josh ( talk) 20:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
i think it should be the first pokémon in the pokédex order, in this case latias cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep per Raymond. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:NOTFANDOM. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete If it's not mentioned in the article as a common term, it's just fancruft and shouldn't be a redirect. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 19:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: fancruft and XY. Queen of Hearts 08:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Week Keep per Raymond1992A ( talk · contribs) and utopes ( talk · contribs) - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 16:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    I mean, I didn't really add anything on this nomination, but I suppose I could probably justify the !vote. If the "@" sign is used to signify both an "a" and an "o", that seems to be an intentional stylistic decision that still indicates the subject, which wouldn't conflict with anything as being the only subject on Wikipedia titled "Latias". But this time, it has the benefit of signifying "Latias and Latios", which might be sought by readers in this way. Basically what Raymond said; this is a method of specifying the subject in a possibly reasonable way, all while being more likely than something like "Celebi: The Legendary Pokemon" which is highly unlikely to be formatted as such. Unlike that, this is just a difference in a character, from an a to an @. Utopes ( talk / cont) 03:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep – Apparently a search term used by some groups. Latios and Latias shows precedent of redirect the duo to Latias, which seems fine to me. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 09:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Not a problematic WP:XY redirect, as the target is "a location in which both topics are discussed." Redirecting to Latias makes sense because it precedes Latios in the list. PleaseStand ( talk) 11:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Manhattan Raid

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 17:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Has nothing to do with 9/11. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 16:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep. Google results tell me that this was Al Qaida's name for what became known as the September 11 attacks (or possibly just the New York part, that's not immediately clear). It is also (in) the title of several works about the event. Thryduulf ( talk) 16:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per Thryduulf. Utopes ( talk / cont) 20:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per above rationale - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 16:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:46 a.m

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 18#Tuesday, September 11, 2001 8:46 a.m

September 11 airstrikes

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 17:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Not a series of airstrikes. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 16:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • According to the airstrike article, an airstrike is "an offensive operation carried out by aircraft". That definition seems to apply here as well, so keep. Utopes ( talk / cont) 20:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - I struggle to understand why anyone would search on this term. I am leaning toward delete. - Dyork ( talk) 21:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep per Utopes. Seems not particularly likely, but it doesn't appear to refer to anything else. 🌺 Cremastra ( talk) 02:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep per Utopes - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 16:43, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep – I can definitely see this being used. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 09:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Terrorist attacks on New York, WA, and Pennsylvania

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 23:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Pointless and confusable due to two reasons: A. PA was not an intended target and Flight 93 crashed there. and B. WA can also refer to the state. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 15:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • It's unlikely to switch using the full names, to the abbreviation for Washington, back to the full name for Pennsylvania. If created today it might be actionable. However, this redirect has existed since 2006, is typo-free, doesn't conflict with anything, and still is clear in its target. Weak Keep, probably, isn't doing much harm, unless there was another terrorist attack on those three places. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as implausible. As Utopes says above, it is very unlikely that anyone would search for the full state name, an abbreviation, and a full state name. But more to the point, it wasn't Washington state that was targeted, it was DC (or to be more precise, Virginia). I would agree with Utopes if the abbreviation were VA or DC, but it isn't. WA is unambiguously the state abbreviation of the Pacific Northwest state, and is clearly incorrect, as opposed to the redirect Terrorist attacks on New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania, which is plausible as "Washington" is ambiguous. – Epicgenius ( talk) 19:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Epicgenius because WA is clearly incorrect. Jay 💬 17:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2001 New York attacks

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. Unanimous to keep and then withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Skynxnex ( talk) 15:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

While the attacks DID happen in New York, it is not a common name or search term, so I suggest Delete. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 15:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep and withdrawn It's plausible. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 13:39, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

GOOMY

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#GOOMY

Dialga the temporal pokemon

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 23:46, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible search, created as fancruft cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Appears to be a possible and relevant search term based on some Googling. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    "temporal" is dialga's category. literally every pokémon has one, and some share their categoies. as an example, the bulbasaur line and sunkern are all known as the "seed pokémon". it's as minor as a game mechanic can get, so i believe it can be deleted as fancruft cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, no mention of temporal, leave this to Bulbapedia. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete, Dialga on its own already gets you to List of generation IV Pokémon#Dialga. I can think of no reason why a fan would search for this full title without first searching for the name on its own. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest ( talk) 00:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Shiny Dialga

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 23:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible search cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Apparently that's a variation of the Pokemon and shinies are all the rage, so it seems like a possible search term that could be useful. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, we have no content on Shiny Dialga, which is a separate subject in its own right, and one that doesn't need to have a redirect. Leave it for Bulbapedia to do its shiny deepdive. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete since our content for Shiny pokemon doesn't have any info on Dialga. I don't mind getting one though. -- Lenticel ( talk) 03:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Comment Wouldn't discussion about [[Shiny <Pokémon species>]] redirects as a whole a better idea? - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 15:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    for the three redirects we currently have, for the possibility of making more, or for a theoretical article about shiny pokémon?
    because if shiny pokémon as a concept are found to be notable enough to warrant more than a paragraph in the gameplay article, then there could be some more redirects, though that case... isn't entirely impossible, now that i think about it
    do think the reception to individual shinies that aren't "black reptile" has yet to reach any form of coverage aside from memes about how much pink and lime green shinies suck cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Arueus

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Arueus

Dialaga

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Dialaga

ROADSCHOOLING!

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 WP:CSD#G7. The nominator is the only contributor. Thryduulf ( talk) 16:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Pointless redirect, I initially made this because of a YouTube video that I laughed at, but it's not mentioned in the main article. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 14:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

RegiKing

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. Complex/ Rational 17:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

yet another fake fakemon page turned redirect cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Based on some Googling, it appears to be an alternative name for Regigas. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    all i got were fan or program-made fusions between regigigas and pokémon with "king" in their names (namely nidoking and slaking, but not slowking yet), some instagram users, and ironically, that redirect, so i'm a bit more inclined to disagree with that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Delete: Looks like I took a fansite to be something more relevant. Found a Pokemon card for it and everything, turned out to be fan made. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete not an alternative name, seems to be based on pre-release unsourced speculation. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Fan-made means WP:NOTFANDOM / WP:NEO / WP:TAKEYOURPICK. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. This was an unsourced stub for 8 minutes after creation in 2006. Jay 💬 15:22, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Jirachio

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo, created as either vandalism or a weird fanfic cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Toetchic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Toetchic

Terchic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Terchic

Torshic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Torshic

Mud Fish Pokémon

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:49, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible everything cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Note: Bundled otherwise identical redirects, with modification. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, no mention of "mud fish", leave this one to Bulbapedia. Confusing here and not worth covering. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Fuzzy Tree

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Fuzzy Tree

Celebi: The Legendary Pokemon

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:50, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible search, minor spelling mistake, and also wrong category cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete, not likely to be searched in this way, an otherwise useless redirect. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk) 04:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Teddiursla

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo...? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete, random letter inserted which has no reason to be there, no other "l"s or l sounds to be seen, and is at the opposite end of the keyboard. Really not needed. Utopes ( talk / cont) 23:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Sneasel EX

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Sneasel EX

Shukle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Shukle

Red Lightning (Pokémon)

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

who calls it that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete, no mention at target, not worth maintaining. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • (also bundled the other Red Lightning redirect from an earlier nom). Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:45, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Chikoritas

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 15:38, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible pluralization cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Pichu Pokemon Nintendo

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

nonsense, seemingly created as nonsense. wikipedia website wikimedia cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Torichc

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 💬 15:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo and wrong pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Venusaurs

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 15:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible pluralization cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

GENWUNNER

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

WRONG TARGET I THINK, ALSO WHY IS IT IN ALL CAPS cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • DELETER, the extra letters added to the end make this more of an association with the meme, and even less of a helpful redirect. Turning "gen wun" into an agent noun, a la "someone who gen wuns", is even more implausible for not being a Wikipedia topic. Neither "Genwun" or "Genwunner" appear anywhere on Wikipedia for that matter. Utopes ( talk / cont) 23:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Comment: "GENWUN" sounds like "Gen one", as in "generation 1". The target seems intentional, but is it helpful/likely? Steel1943 ( talk) 23:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Steel1943, per https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/genwunner it probably is. See also wikt:genwunner. This seems like the correct target, and alternate capitalization is not a reason to delete a redirect. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 00:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
(re Steel at first, later turns into re:Waid from wiktionary) Yes, under the GENWUN RfD I mentioned that "genwun" was the phonetic spelling of "gen 1", also alongside the Know Your Meme page, although I probably should've highlighted this here as well. The current target is definitely intentional due to "genwunner" being a Pokemon meme associated with Pokemon's first gen. At the end of the day though, this meme is not covered, or even acknowledged, anywhere on Wikipedia (between both "genwun" and "genwunner"). There's no on-Wikipedia-justification for targeting a meme-word meaning: "Someone who likes only the first generation of the Pokémon franchise", to the respective list of Pokemon from that generation, and would leave readers that use this term confused without a mention of what they were looking for. I'm shocked to learn that there's a wiktionary page for this made-up slang, but pointing it as a soft redirect to Wikt:genwunner is far better than the status quo. Utopes ( talk / cont) 01:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The wiki isn't an indiscriminate collection of memes -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

GENWUN

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:29, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

WHY IS IT IN ALL CAPS cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • DELETE, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of memes, which apparently this is one. Nobody would be able to tell as it isn't discussed at the target article, but further information can be found at Know Your Meme. Not sure that the phonetic spelling of "gen one" needs to be a redirect to a list of such Pokemon, so I lean deletion here. Utopes ( talk / cont) 23:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    could maybe make an argument for the article on the games themselves, but even then you'd need actual sources on genwunners
    still not sure why it had to be in all caps cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete The wiki isn't an indiscriminate collection of memes -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Shiny Pidgey

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 💬 15:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible search cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: Apparently that's a variation of the Pokemon and shinies are all the rage, so it seems like a possible search term to me. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    from my snooping around, pidgey, pikachu, and dialga are the only pokémon with "shiny" redirects (and pikachu's doesn't even link to its article or the list of gen 1 pokémon), shininess is a really minor mechanic in mainline pokémon (to the point of shiny pokémon not being mentioned once in the lists of pokémon, and only in one paragraph plus a line in the gameplay article), and on a less formal note, absolutely no one cares about shiny pidgey and dialga
    so i think the options would be deleting those three or... making redirects for every other pokémon? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    absolutely no one cares about shiny pidgey and dialga – I mean, clearly someone did if they created these redirects. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    i got nae naed on lol cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, we have no information on Shiny Pidgey. Can confirm that Dialga, Pikachu, and Pidgey are the only shiny Pokemon redirects currently in existence. Because these are not 1:1 alternate names for the targets, people using the "shiny" qualifier would almost certainly be looking for information on the Shiny variant, which is a topic not covered on Wikipedia. Better left to Bulbapedia to do its thing on that front. Utopes ( talk / cont) 23:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Pleck, Forne, Sherborne, Dorset

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Pleck Green is in Holwell, and it's unclear what "Forne" refers to. Google search for Pleck, Forne and Dorset only finds a book about place names in Herefordshire where a place called Forne in the Domesday Book is said to be possibly the same as Ford, Herefordshire. Peter James ( talk) 13:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

The cute little Aurora Beamer

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

funny, but alolan vulpix is cuter cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per nom, Alolan Vulpix is cuter so therefore this redirect should be deleted as heresy (also, perhaps more reasonably, this term does not appear at the target and has no chance of being a likely / alternate search. 😉) Utopes ( talk / cont) 22:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as unlikely synonym. Agree on vulpix. -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Misty's Dewgong

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:54, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

non-notable within the context of the list cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Dugong (Pokémon)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 16:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible search? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:58, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep per above rationale - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 07:20, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Aqua Ring

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 Aquarium of Genoa#Conservation. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Aqua Tail

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 14:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

someone really really likes seel in particular cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • It's because this redirect previously pointed at a former article dedicated to Seel and Dewgong where it bore a mention. After the BLAR, all incoming redirects were repointed, to a target where they no longer have a home. Delete in this case. Utopes ( talk / cont) 22:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete – Move belongs to pretty much all water Pokémon that have a tail, and was introduced in gen 4. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 09:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Aurora Beam

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 November 1882 geomagnetic storm#Capron's beam. Jay 💬 16:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

...why? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Dewgong the dugong

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:03, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

uh huh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Seel the seal

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

uh huh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Dratini and Dragonair

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Dratini and Dragonair

Pokemon hitmonlee

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Pokemon hitmonlee

Caterpie, Metapod and Butterfree

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 16:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

copy of another redirect without the oxford comma cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: @ Cogsan, one version of a redirect having an Oxford comma and the other not ( Caterpie, Metapod, and Butterfree) is not a valid deletion rationale. Hey man im josh ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Speedy Keep, flawed RfD not worth discussing here as the modification is hardly problematic. Would be a different story if the two titles were nominated together, but I have no idea if that was the intention based on the nomination opening statement. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:41, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Qbone

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 16:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible spelling cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep: I think it's a very plausible search term for Cubone. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep – I think it's cute, but more importantly, this is exactly the sort of redirect that I would find useful. A fairly likely misspelling to happen a few times, I think. Probably alongside Qubone, Quebone, and Cuebone... ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat) 09:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Secure Transport

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 18#Secure Transport

Failtorb

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 💬 17:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

vandalism? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: Clearly a humour redirect that's not helpful. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete Obscure synonym at best. It's probably because there are certain pokeball looking items in the games that reveal themselves as voltorbs/ electrodes and then explode on your pokemons. I assume that's a fail. -- Lenticel ( talk) 07:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above rationale - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 16:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Electrode(pokemon)

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 No consensus to move, no real need to as the history has no substantive content. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC) reply

minor writing mistake, and minor spelling mistake too cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per WP:RDAB due to the missing space between the word and the disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Electrode (pokemon), doesn't exist. 176.33.241.125 ( talk) 14:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    electrode (pokémon) does though, so that's somewhat less bad
    but since there are redirects with and without the accent, the minor spelling mistake i pointed out was the lowercase p cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Created, as redirects are cheap and most people don't have the alt code for the e with an accent memorized. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete although its existed since 2007 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Move without redirect to Electrode (pokemon) in case someone wants to maintain the 2007 creation date instead of a 2024 one, probably wasn't necessary to make the new redirect from scratch when this could've went there instead. Maybe not a big deal though. As long as this link is red. Utopes ( talk / cont) 01:28, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Move without leaving a redirect to Electrode (pokemon) to fix the WP:RDAB issue while still preserving the page history. InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs) 17:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete, and if possible also delete Electrode (pokemon), recently created only because of this RfD. The proper-cased Electrode (Pokemon) has existed from 2004. Jay 💬 17:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Alakhazam

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 Alakazam. Jay 💬 17:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo and wrong pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Seels

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Seels

Aero (Aerodactyl)

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 13:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

i have no idea what the purpose of this is supposed to be cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

correction: it was initially about an aerodactyl in a manga. not very notable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete I don't get this one. TarkusAB talk/ contrib 02:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Delete. No idea. Someone's nickname for their own Aerodactyl maybe? ;) Andrzejbanas ( talk) 20:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Gravelers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 17:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible pluralization cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Likitung

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 17:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible minor spelling mistake cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Saidon (pokémon)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Saidon (pokémon)

Horsea, Seadra, Kingra

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

minor spelling mistake cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete. A basic type-o redirect. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 20:40, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Polygonz

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Polygonz

PolygonZ

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 generation IV Pokémon#Porygon-Z. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo, and wrong pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Hill Climb Racing 2

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. The Hill Climb Racing 2 sequel is mentioned in the lead section; there is insufficient content to justify a separate article, and well, we don't want to disappoint readers who might want to search for the sequel. A separate article may be created in the future if and when content justifies that. If someone wants to make it a section link, OK, but just linking to the top avoids this stupid issue recurring in the future. wbm1058 ( talk) 17:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC) reply

The section doesn't exist anymore, so will this page be reverted to this revision? 176.33.241.125 ( talk) 12:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Restore and send to AfD as it seems there is a dispute about whether this is notable or not and AfD is the place to get consensus about that. Thryduulf ( talk) 16:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to Hill Climb Racing#Sequels where it is mentioned. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Thryduulf: Pinging you since I'm assuming you overlooked that mention. Steel1943 ( talk) 23:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    I didn't overlook the mention, it's just not relevant because the page history shows a dispute over whether this should be an article or a redirect. Thryduulf ( talk) 01:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Fair enough. Either way, I'm going to stick with my stance because I don't think the nominator noticed the mention or is questioning the notability. The target I referenced directs readers to where the subject is mentioned and identified. Steel1943 ( talk) 02:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    I don't understand why you think the existence of the dispute isn't relevant? If this is notable then there should be a disambig or hatnote, if it isn't then we can consider whether the title should redirect and if so where to. Thryduulf ( talk) 15:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    ...Because it seems obvious the nominator doesn't see the dispute as relevant enough to take to AFD either, and most likely just overlooked the fact that the section name got changed from "Sequel" to "Sequels" and then started this discussion. That, and if it's notable, someone who knows how Wikipedia works will eventually try to revive an article again at this title. Either way, per the edit history, the multiple WP:BLARs happened almost instantaneously after the content was created (1st BLAR occurred a week after the article was created in 2016, and the 2nd BLAR happened a day after content was reestablished in he middle of 2021), so I rarely say this but ... I think AFD in this case would be a time waster. This redirect has been a redirect consistently for about 2.5 years now, and before that it was a redirect for about 4.5 years ... I think what we got is the best we are gonna get. Steel1943 ( talk) 16:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    If the page is restored, I think anyone will suggest a retarget if it will not be expanded. If still not, please speedy close this discussion as retarget, so I could withdraw it. 176.33.241.125 ( talk) 18:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Fix the target to the plural per Steel. The section exists. Jay 💬 11:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Glacia (Eon)

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo (this is a typo, right?) and wrong pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

PorigonZ

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 generation IV Pokémon#Porygon-Z. Complex/ Rational 17:24, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

implausible typo and wrong pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Mew Glith

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:10, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

minor spelling mistake cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Delete I have never seen anyone referring to Mew as Mew Glith - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 16:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
it's actually a typo of " mew glitch", basically an umbrella term for like 5 different-ish glitches used to catch mew
still implausible, probably cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Jewish Nazis

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. Most participants seem to agree that there could be a legitimate use of this term, but it's not one we can deliver on currently. -- BDD ( talk) 18:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I can see the rationale used when targeting this page to its target, but I'm not sure if this is useful and/or helpful. The target does not describe the members as "Jewish Nazis" verbatim, which leads me to believe that further eyes on this redirect may be warranted. Utopes ( talk / cont) 06:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Comment this is a term that gets lots of hits in a variety of reliable (and unreliable) sources, but it isn't consistently used to refer to a single topic. Referents include various WWII-era pro-Nazi Jewish people/organisations/ideologies, Jewish people/organisations that collaborated with Nazi Germany (not necessarily voluntarily), Jewish people that espoused/practised ideologies similar to WWII-era Nazis post-WWII (e.g. in Apartheid South Africa), Jewish people/organisations that espouse/practice behaviour towards (especially) Palestinians that is/are/are alleged to be comparable to the way people/organisations in Nazi Germany acted towards Jews, and in relation to conspiracy theories about Jews (I haven't looked to see if this is just an epithet, an analogy, literal accusation or a mixture). So in summary, I think the current target is not wrong per se, but too narrow, and there probably should be something at this title although I'm unsure if that's an article, a broad concept or a set index. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete: not suitable as a redirect to the original target. Oppose retargeting as ahistorical and misleading since the Jews who collaborated with the Germans weren't Nazis. -- K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
    Certainly not all of the were Nazis (AIUI it's debatable in some cases), but they are one of multiple groups of people who have been described as such. It's that ambiguity that means I Oppose retarget to Jewish collaboration with Nazi Germany, but it should be linked from an article/set index/broad concept at this title. Thryduulf ( talk) 01:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to Jewish collaboration with Nazi Germany The sum of all human knowledge ( talk) 00:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as misleading to the current and proposed targets. I did not find any lists or sub-categories for Jews under Category:People from Nazi Germany or Category:Nazis either. Jay 💬 09:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. There is no one target which does not have the potential to confuse or surprise the reader. It's one of those cases where we shouldn't second guess what the searcher means by an adjective-noun combination, except in this particular case it is contentious. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 09:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Brumak

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Retarget to Gears of War (video game)#Ports as the only suggestion that came up, and no support for the status quo. Jay 💬 17:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC) reply

A redirect with some history that once targeted a list of Gears of War characters (that has since been converted into a redirect), this character receives some mention on various Gears of War related articles..... NONE of which, I should say, are the main Gears of War article itself (not to mention the Settings section which has since been removed). It's clear that this current target is not helpful due to no presence on the page, but is there an alternative? Or delete? Utopes ( talk / cont) 03:55, 25 January 2024 (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 13:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Tagged with "R from merge".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak retarget to Gears of War (video game)#Ports since that seems to be an early/first time the player can fight the monster. And the ref has an interview that discussions the creature a fair bit. Skynxnex ( talk) 19:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Put that cookie down now

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 💬 09:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Quote that isn't mentioned at the target article in any capacity, making this an unhelpful and confusing redirect. "Cookie" appears only in the footer for Wikipedia's "Cookie Statement"... Utopes ( talk / cont) 09:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Our princess is in another castle

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 Our princess is in another castle!. Cool article, withdrawing & speedy retarget now that it exists. (non-admin closure) Utopes ( talk / cont) 05:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Not mentioned at the target article, not a helpful redirect out of context as we don't have any information about this quote, leaving readers stranded when they arrive. The Mario Wiki is more fitting for this material. Utopes ( talk / cont) 09:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep it's actually used in the video game. GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 13:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Google YouTube

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 Refine to YouTube#"Broadcast Yourself" era (2006–2013). Jay 💬 09:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Unhelpful WP:XY redirect, both articles mention both names to begin with, and does not seem to have any helpful use-cases. Utopes ( talk / cont) 09:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Keep since YouTube is owned by Google. 176.33.241.125 ( talk) 12:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak keep Google does own YouTube.p GabrielPenn4223 ( talk) 13:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Refine to YouTube#"Broadcast Yourself" era (2006–2013) which deals with Google's acquisition of YouTube. Someone using this search term is likely looking for information about Google's ownership or management of YouTube, and that's the best starting point for that I've found. Thryduulf ( talk) 12:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per IP or refine per Thryduulf. I do think refining the target may be more appropriate. Hey man im josh ( talk) 16:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ubiquitous

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. Participants considered all suggestions of the nomination. While there was support for wiktionary from more than one participant, there was opposition as well. As the current target was deleted, and there was no support foe deleting this redirect, retargeting to Omnipresence, also the previous target, as an alternative. Jay 💬 17:30, 20 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Hi, the page was originally targeted towards Omnipresence.

Ubiquitous (adjective) was created by Starlighsky as they wanted it to explain the dictionary definition. (WP:NOT issues) They'd probably would like a redirect to Wikitionary instead.

It could also redirect to Ubiquity or serve as its own disambig ( [1]) Just i yaya 11:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • I want to explain the details of the issue: Ubiquitous is used in medical and computer science terminology for "that which seems to be everywhere", however ubiquitous was redirecting to omnipresence. An new article had been created to solve the problem, ubiquitous (adjective) but adjective had been added because ubiquitous was already taken as an article. Starlighsky ( talk) 20:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Stalighsky reply
  • Soft redirect to wikt. We should have regard for the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ubiquitous (adjective). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Redirect to Omnipresence as the only page that mentions the term. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 01:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to Ubiquity, a reasonable dab page, assuming the likely delete outcome at the associated AFD. What a mess. Alternatively, deletion would be reasonable too. Wiktionary redirects are harmful, as they get in the way of the normal search feature, and redundant, since the normal search feature always includes a prominent link to the Wikt entry when there is one, anyway. 35.139.154.158 ( talk) 16:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • I think targeting Ubiquity would be odd and a borderline WP:ASTONISH violation, since none of the entries on that dab page are relevant to the meaning or usage of the adjective ubiquitous. The only thing relevant on that page is the link to Wiktionary's ubiquity page, which is less informative than a direct link to its ubiquitous page would be. Deor ( talk) 00:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk pages. Note that the current target was deleted as an outcome of its target's AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree with soft redirect to wikt. From my search, creating a dab page with the title "ubiquitous", would be a violation of WP:PARTIAL. Wikt explains the term and provides the best benefit to the readers. Ca talk to me! 05:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

New Soup

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 10:04, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Nickname not mentioned at the target article, vague and unhelpful redirect. Utopes ( talk / cont) 09:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

delete. it's a good way to find the relaxalax fans lurking around, but not really helpful in any way, shape, form, or a fourth thing actually related to wikipedia cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:30, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Woke agenda

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#Woke agenda

CCFL inverter

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 17#CCFL inverter

Failed wannabe star

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 10:14, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

According to the edit summary, brown dwarfs were called by this name in one Youtube video, to which I presume this became a local meme in the associated community. The various meanings of the word "star" aside, not a synonym nor a likely search term for the subject. Utopes ( talk / cont) 08:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • DELETE! Brown dwarfs are called failed stars, but failed wannabe stars is the type of crap that makes Wikipedia look lame. -- Kheider ( talk) 12:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Even without this phrase being considered WP:NEO, which it seems to be, this phrase is ambiguous since it could refer to other concepts, such as entertainers trying to get famous and/or work and failing to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 18:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per above. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 20:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ketel Marte's 19-game post-season hitting streak

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 💬 12:24, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

There is an 18-game and 20-game version of this redirect, the contents of which merged into the main article following a deletion discussion in this AfD. Despite neither being likely search terms, the 19 version has no relevant history as an in-between move, and also is not mentioned at the target. Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Second Cold War inn the Middle East

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 💬 12:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

New redirect with unlikely spelling of "inn". I don't foresee this having inn-y benefit. Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Secure transport company

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 💬 12:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

No mention of "secure" at the target article. I'd hope that ALL transport companies are "secure", which is what comes up when searching google (just transport). A lack of any youth connotation could make this target a WP:SURPRISE for searchers. Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Airport MRT station

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 airport stations. There is a consensus against deletion, and List of airport stations has received the most support among targets which can disambiguate the title. (non-admin closure) feminist🩸 ( talk) 06:35, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

There are several different Airport MRT stations that this title may refer to. This partial title match is often shared with other stations, and would otherwise be a generic title which can confuse readers, just as it confused me. Utopes ( talk / cont) 22:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk of proposed target "Airport station".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Redirect to List of airport stations per thryduulf ( talk · contribs) - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉( talk| contributions) 17:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Play of Saint Lawrence

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. None of these redirects actually had history, but withdrawing now that an article exists at this title. (non-admin closure) Utopes ( talk / cont) 03:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Not mentioned at target, not a very helpful redirect pointed at a page for a language. The edit summary of just a URL does not help as much as required, given that I'm left still confused. Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete - whether or not there is a connection, it is not discussed in the article. A7V2 ( talk) 22:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. I am going to create it in a few minutes. No need to delete its history. Cheers, RodRabelo7 ( talk) 20:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  •  Comment: Speedy keep, created. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 23:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Orthodox Muslim

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 Orthodoxy#Islam. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I am not sure this is unambiguous, and the redirect could create bias if not. — Lights and freedom ( talk ~ contribs) 07:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Orthodox Islam

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 Orthodoxy#Islam. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I am not sure this is unambiguous. While Orthodoxy#Islam claims it could refer to Sunni Islam, the edit summary in changing this redirect target seems non-neutral. — Lights and freedom ( talk ~ contribs) 07:28, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

Marathi Medium

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Marathi Medium

John Xina

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. Hey man im josh ( talk) 15:12, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Same reasons as the deletion for Zhong xina brought about by this discussion; refers to a meme no longer covered at the target. This case does use the name "John", but still feels unlikely, even if somewhat closer. The lowercase has some history, but I don't foresee it ever being utilized given the nature of it. Utopes ( talk / cont) 06:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

2024 GOP

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. There's no consensus to delete; while delete !voters argued that this incomplete term could refer to any number of 2024 things in the Republican Party, and search results would do best, while keep !voters argued that searches for this term mostly returned results about the primaries, making it a plausible redirect. There was some support for retargeting, however not enough to form a consensus to retarget. (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts she/they talk/ stalk 15:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Lots of things are happening in the Republican Party in 2024, not just the primaries. If I had to pick a target it would be History of the Republican Party (United States) § The Biden years: 2021–present, but I don't really think this is a plausible search term. So, delete. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 03:13, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Couldn't disagree more. Make a Google search using the terms "2024 GOP." It's nothing but articles discussing the primaries. As plausible as it gets. That's why I even added the redirect. TheCelebrinator ( talk) 05:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep as seems to point to the right target, seems plausible enough. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 10:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep try typing it into google and see what comes up. Scu ba ( talk) 19:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    • Google and Wikipedia handle searches differently. Google is trying to find webpages (particularly recent ones) most associated with the words you search. For "2024 GOP", sure, that's the 2024 GOP primaries. That doesn't mean that, for Wikipedia's purposes, "2024 GOP" is a term used to refer to the GOP primaries. What we care about is search terms that could plausibly refer to the article's subject or to a concept discussed in an article. Unlike Google, we don't give someone a results list when there's a redirect; we confidently tell them, "This is what you meant". And we can't confidently assert that here, because "2024 GOP" already means something else: the Republican Party as exists in 2024 (as in "the 2024 GOP cares a lot about immigration"). It does not mean, and has never meant, the 2024 Republican primaries. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 20:22, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per TheCelebrinator and Alextejithompson. It's clear that the primary topic for people using this search term is the 2024 GOP primaries, it's also clear that it is a plausible search term. Thryduulf ( talk) 21:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    @ Thryduulf: Can you point to any sources actually using this term to refer to the primaries themselves? This isn't something like Euro 2024 that's a common shortening of a longer name. It's just the first two words of 2024 GOP primaries, which is why it comes up in search results. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 23:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    As this is not a request to move the page to that title, that isn't relevant. There are only two questions that are relevant: 1. is this a plausible search term, and 2. if so, what is the best target for a redirect from this title. The answer to question 1 is "yes" - we have evidence above to that effect. The answer to 2 is unquestionably the current target. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Of course it's relevant, Thryduulf. We do not keep redirects that are just an arbitrary fragment of a name for something, simply because Google associates that fragment with its whole. Would we redirect 2024 Summer to 2024 Summer Olympics? Most Google results for it are about just that. 96th Academy to 96th Academy Awards? Same thing there. If no sources refer to the primaries as "2024 GOP", then that is not just relevant here, it is the only thing that is relevant here. So again, I ask that someone show sources that anyone other than TheCelebrinator uses this term this way. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 02:27, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    Indeed we don't keep arbitrary fragments when they aren't useful and/or don't have a single clear target. e.g. the first page of Google hits for "2024 summer" is dominated by results for summer holidays (a mix of ideas and people wanting me to buy a holiday from them) but also includes the Olympics, Paralympics and fashion trends. While "96th Academy" does have a primary topic (in the Oscars) it's not a plausible search term imo as it lacks any nouns (although if anyone presents data to contradict this I'll be happy to change my mind). We have actual evidence above that people regard "2024 GOP" as a useful search term, and no evidence of harm so WP:WR#KEEP point 5 applies. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:07, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply
    From my geolocation, at least, the incognito Google results for "2024 Summer" are almost entirely about the Olympics. And no, we don't have evidence that people find it a useful search term. We have evidence that people Googled it and that Google took them to pages about this topic. No one here has actually said that this is something that they or anyone they know would ever expect to redirect to the current target. Because it isn't. It's nonsensical. It makes as much sense as targeting October 2022 Conservative Party to October 2022 Conservative Party leadership election. As to evidence of harm? Sure. Yet again, this literally means something else. It's just that it's a fragment of a more common phrase so it doesn't come up as high in search results... much as the primary meaning of "2024 Summer" is the summer of 2024, even if Google thinks it's the Olympics. Here is an RS opinion article using "2024 GOP" to refer to the Republican Party in 2024. Here it was used in the pre-clickthrough headline for this RS article. Here [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] is usage by various bloggers or commenters. Meanwhile we're still at 0 sources using the term to refer to the Republican primaries, and I have not found any such sources, reliable or otherwise, in my research. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed ( they|xe) 18:07, 25 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per Tamzin. This seems like an inapt redirect, namely because the "2024 GOP" simply is the Republican Party itself, rather than a mere series of presidential primaries. I would prefer a target of History of the Republican Party (United States)#The Biden years: 2021–present over the current target if kept, also per Tamzin. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 01:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom, who has shown convincing evidence that "2024 GOP" does not exclusively refer to the presidential primaries. The suggested alternative target does not seem particularly useful to me, but I could weakly accept it as an ATD. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 14:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Seems like a case where it's better to let the reader look at the search results themselves, instead of us trying to guess what they're looking for. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 04:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Oppose status quo (current target). Honestly, I'd expect this to point to Republican Party (United States)#Trump era (2016–present). Not sure what the best target may or may not be, but where it currently targets is lacking (perhaps even surprising). Also, wikipedia is not a search engine; it makes sense that such sites would pull information up related to the primaries first given current news cycles (but that doesn't make it the primary topic for our purposes, at least certainly not with an eye to the near and especially distant future). —  Godsy ( TALK CONT) 22:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes ( talk / cont) 06:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Delete per nom - not a plausible search term as being incomplete. We may have a 2024 GOP debates redirect though, similar to 2016 GOP debates and 2012 GOP debates. We already have 2024 GOP primaries. Jay 💬 16:19, 17 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. Plausible search term and useful per above. Sorry, don't see how anybody can argue with that – not effectively anyway. Cheep cheap. P.I. Ellsworth ,  ed.  put'er there 15:32, 22 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to 2024 Republican National Convention. We're probably heading for no consensus anyway, but I think this is the single event most likely to be referred to this way in the long term. I really don't like interpreting this as "State of the Republican Party in 2024" because of how squishy that is and how many potential targets there are. If I must choose between a straight keep or delete, I'd say keep. -- BDD ( talk) 18:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Godsy and Tamzin. The keep argument reasoning smacks of WP:RECENTISM: the primaries the GOP news of this minute, but are unlikely to be the primary topic long term. signed, Rosguill talk 05:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply
    RECENTISM is about article content. Redirects should take people to the content they are looking for now, and can and should change if the primary topic does. Thryduulf ( talk) 11:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Weak Keep. As GOP is a redirect to the Republican Party, I think it is plausible that "2024 GOP" would infer the "state of the Republican Party [GOP] in 2024". While that's a pretty broad topic with a lot of options, I feel the primaries (or the National Convention) are the articles that best exemplify the GOP in 2024. The primaries moreso than the convention, as this is more encompassing and specifically related to the 2024 election year as a whole beyond a single event. Utopes ( talk / cont) 05:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Tamzin and Godsy. The Republican Party in 2024 is much broader than the presidential primaries (lots going on in the 118th United States Congress, plenty of non-presidential elections, etc.). If I had to pick a target, I don't think we can get any narrower than 2024 in the United States. -- Tavix ( talk) 19:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Deep state in Russia

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 * Pppery * it has begun... 00:13, 18 February 2024 (UTC) reply

No longer mentioned at target, although Deep state § Chechnya is there, so we could retarget there? Or just delete. Queen of Hearts 06:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

  • Weak delete, the proposed target could work but it's not a great fit for the search term. Utopes ( talk / cont) 07:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ai tool

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. Deleted by Widr 3 minutes after nomination. (non-admin closure) Utopes ( talk / cont) 06:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I had an edit war with CycloneYoris over this. In short: Bhawaybhalla6 (who seems to only be here for spam, by the way) wrote a spammy/promotional article about AI tools at this title; CycloneYoris nominated it for speedy deletion per CSD G11; I noticed this page and redirected it to Artificial intelligence because it seemed like a plausible search term; CycloneYoris undid my edit, stating unnecessary. Please let an admin delete this. We don't want spam hidden in any page history.; finally, I undid his edit because I still thought that "Ai tool" was a plausible search term anyways. But I don't want to edit war, so to RfD I go instead. Duckmather ( talk) 06:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

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

NORF

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#NORF

Norf

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 16#Norf

T:R from

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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Not often linked to like T:DYK or T:ITN, doesn't need an XNR. Previously nominated in a batch at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November 18#T:WPTECH and closed as no consensus, every single redirect there has been deleted in later separate noms except this one. Queen of Hearts 04:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

There's also T:ONES and T:SINGLE, but I agree to delete this. Utopes ( talk / cont) 04:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Hilda Murray (Q18954256)

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 deleted. Isabelle Belato 🏳‍🌈 11:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Title was moved from another title seemingly created by mistake. Deauthorized. ( talk) 02:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply

Note: one link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by nationality/United Kingdom would need to be fixed. I would do it myself but my tab keeps freezing when I try to edit the page. Deauthorized. ( talk) 03:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_9&oldid=1214033564"