Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 17

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

October 17

edit

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 17, 2024.

Typhoon Katrina

edit

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) ZZZ'S 00:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible. No instance of a typhoon being named Katrina. Redirect has very little visits. ZZZ'S 23:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, it still seems like a plausible redirect to me. I’d assume people, particularly those who don’t distinguish between “hurricane” and “typhoon” could mix the two up. SirMemeGod  23:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am pretty sure that no one would confuse typhoon with hurricane for a record-breaking, costly, and deadly tropical cyclone. There is a threshold for when titles for tropical cycles would never be mixed. Katrina exceeds that. ZZZ'S 00:11, 18 October 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).

Turn Off the Lights extension

edit

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 23:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Browser extension that is not mentioned at target page. Previously targeted a page about the extension that was deleted at AfD, leaving no content about this on Wikipedia. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:27, 17 October 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).

Nerubian

edit

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. Legoktm (talk) 07:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. Mentioned once in passing at Mummy (undead) and at World of Warcraft: The War Within but neither of those have enough substance to support a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More options came up after the 2nd relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Crazy doing a 4th relist for this, but ... there seems to not be consensus supporting the current status quo, and I don't see a WP:BARTENDER close fixing this since stances are all over the place.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:57, 17 October 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).

Soundtack for guitar hero world tour

edit

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. WP:INVOLVED. But there's no need to keep discussing this one. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 06:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final one of the questionably plausibly misspelled "soundtrack" redirects I'll be listing here for now. This thing used to be a stub article about the soundtrack (the initial version of which can be found here) for seven minutes on July 28, 2008 until it was turned into a redirect for the relevant section of the game's article, then about a month and a half later it was taken to the present target. It also hasn't been getting very many pageviews nowadays, so I'm not really sure we need to keep it lying around. Regards, SONIC678 06:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the metaphor "lying around" doesn't apply. If you hadn't raised this TfD, this TfD would have got no views, no votes, taken no disk space. It's so much cheaper to leave things like this than to have a discussion about them. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:49, 2 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:59, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As per WP:CHEAP and Rich Farmbrough; save for the lack of capitalization (which isn't necessarily an error, given this redir would also scoop up "Soundtack for Guitar Hero World Tour" requests), this redirect has only one error, being, the word 'soundtrack' is missing one letter. We really don't need to worry about this one. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rich and Lunamann (welcome back LM!) - a redirect should really only be deleted (in my view) if it's pointing to the wrong place or actively doing harm in some way - just being slightly non-standard or unpopular isn't enough justification for deleting a redirect, as they are cheap and could help someone. BugGhost🦗👻 13:44, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, soundtrack is not hard to spell, and those 7 minutes of source-less stub should have never existed. Probably minor enough to not need to be nominated at RfD, but if we're here, we're here; this is not a necessary redirect and maintains the idea that "its okay to duplicate topic content at misspelled locations and keep it forever". Sonic678 honestly you probably should've just moved this redirect to a better title imo; it keeps the (admittedly dubious) history, fixes the typo and saves us from having to talk about this one here. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Got it. I'll get that taken care of. Regards, SONIC678 21:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sonic678: I didn't mean do it now, apologies if it sounded as such. Right now the discussion is trending towards !keep, so now we'll have three redirects instead of two, and the history of one has been somewhat obscured. I was just saying that this could've/should've been moved (without leaving a redirect behind) to a better title and then we wouldn't need to have a discussion over a trivial title such as this. At this point though it's already been moved once, so imo it's better to just leave it be and let the discussion close. Just a tip for the future. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist, given that the redirect at this title was not tagged for RFD for about 3 days after its edit history was moved to Soundtrack for Guitar Hero World Tour. However, since this discussion has already been relisted in the past and the move happened after the previous relist, this discussion can be closed at any time per WP:RELIST.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am not concerned by one-letter-missing redirects. I won't weigh in on the "plausibility" of the misspelling in particular or on whether or not "soundtrack" is hard to spell, since these things are subjective and generally impossible to actually discuss reasonably. So keep per WP:CHEAP. Is it doing harm? Nope. Were people viewing it before this nomination? A bit. No negative small positive = net benefit. Or, 0 0.001 = 0.001 ∴ keep. Cremastra (u — c) 00:24, 19 October 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).

List of Monster Hunter monsters

edit

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 23:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no such list present. was originally blanked and merged (why don't we call those blams?) into monster hunter (video game) after a not-very-lengthy discussion, removed a couple diffs later, and additions to lists in the games' articles have been met with removal ever since cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:20, 17 October 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).

Sound stag

edit

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 23:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect from questionable misspelling. Ibadibam (talk) 18:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Google search shows its not a common alt spelling. Ca talk to me! 05:16, 24 October 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).

R v R (Rape: marital exemption)

edit

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) C F A 💬 19:51, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant redirect due to the existence of R v R. Previously redirected to Marital_rape#Ending_the_exemption but I would argue that its still not needed as the case confirmed the end of any exemption. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 15:54, 17 October 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).

Clash of Clans Town Hall 10

edit

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 23:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need redirects for a particular level of a particular buildable structure in a game. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:48, 17 October 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).

List over Swedens Municipalities

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Implausable word salad variant of title with typos, weird word order, and weird capitalization. Completely implausible) -1ctinus📝🗨 13:59, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the use of two separate spellings of "implausible" aside, delete. that's at least 4 separate mistakes (though i don't think the capitalization is one) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The word order is fine - "List of Sweden's municipalities" is perfectly good English while and the capitalisation is not ideal I'd recommend keeping if that were the only issue. However the combination of "over" for "of" and "Swedens" for "Sweden's" mean this isn't useful. This was created as a list, but if restored it would be speedily deletable as a duplicate (A10) of the article so there is no issue with deleting it here. Thryduulf (talk) 15:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this is a non-fluent translation of the Swedish title, sv:Lista över Sveriges kommuner. Its use on English Wikipedia is implausible. Ibadibam (talk) 18:09, 17 October 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).

Cackala

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 31#Cackala

9jeJbdVl2jI

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:10, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the youtube id of the video which the target page is about. Happy to withdraw if there is precedent. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. The precedent is deletion. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 13#DQw4w9WgXcQ → Rickrolling and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 November 18#JNQXAC9IVRw → Me at the zoo both closed as delete, the latter (closed by user:Deryck Chan) with the summary The rough consensus is in favour of disallowing redirects from YouTube IDs in general.. It's worth noting though that we are not bound by precedent and both discussions had to be relisted before consensus was found. That said, if I had to guess at the IDs most likely to be used as search terms it would be those two. Thryduulf (talk) 13:53, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sidenote, a mention of "DQw4w9WgXcQ" can probably be added to Rickrolling sourced to Baudry, Benoit; Monperrus, Martin (2022). "Exhaustive Survey of Rickrolling in Academic Literature". arXiv:2204.06826. (preprint, but apparently peer-reviewed for [6]), and the redirect recreated. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 21:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per a simple WP:NCT based on the findings of Thryduulf. If the XcQ Youtube ID > Rickrolling is not allowed, then I don't see why this redirect should be-- they would, likely, be graded on the same merits, and on that scale Rickrolling-- and Me At The Zoo-- would very definitely be more notable, by a factor of magnitude, compared to Minecraft Multiplayer Fun.
    I will note that if NCT is disallowed as per WP:OTHERSTUFF, which, completely fair, I'd still like to echo the arguments used against those two redirects. I will note, however, that XcQ is literally the only YouTube ID that I've ever heard of anyone trying to memorize, and it's entirely and specifically in order to avoid being rickrolled. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this one, but as a side note, the DQw4w9WgXcQ redirect should probably be recreated. I think the ID itself has gained special notice and notoriety, and it seems a peer reviewed article confirms. Not EVERY YouTube ID should be a redirect to the video in question, but Rickrolling should probably be an exception. Fieari (talk) 07:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I went ahead and added the rickroll ID redirect. Fieari (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not a likely search term, especially if one goes on Wikipedia. Even if some people memorised this, I don’t think their point would to go on Wikipedia and type this in. There’s little views of this article, anyways. Myrealnamm (💬pros · 📜cons) 20:26, 18 October 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).

Ebony Eyez

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target or at List of Capitol Records artists. Article was previously deleted at AfD and then, roughly 5 years later, A7 deleted as well. Doesn't appear to be a good target for this individual. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:02, 17 October 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).

Razah

edit

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 Hell Razah. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 19:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The performer is not mentioned at the target or at Def Jam Recordings discography. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:59, 17 October 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).

Grenada women's national under-17 football team

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The under-17 football team is not mentioned or discussed in any capacity at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:57, 17 October 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).

Himanshi Gawande

edit

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 Delhi SG Pipers. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:55, 17 October 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).

Council of Narbonne (1017)

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to find evidence on the target page (or google) that there was a council of Narbonne in 1017. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:54, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. It is mentioned at Borrell (bishop of Vic) and might be cited - the following sentence has a source that could plausibly be supporting either one or both sentences, however that source is a book in the Internet Archive's library (currently offline due to a DDOS attack), the only other site that appears to have the text is also temporarily offline for maintenance (and not archived in the wayback machine) so I can't check. That is the only place online I can find mention of any significant events in Narbonne in that year (other than, possibly, an archbishop of the Ancient Diocese of Narbonne retiring). Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Based on a copy available through my university library, the cited source refers to a "council of bishops." There's information here that could plausibly be added to the target, although I'm not versed enough in ecclesiastical history to say if it qualifies for an entry. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:11, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless/until information about a 1017 council of Narbonne is added to the target. This redirect can easily be recreated if it were added later. A7V2 (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Basically an unhelpful redirect directing people to a page that contains no information on the apparent search-term. FOARP (talk) 09:38, 24 October 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).

Meenakshi Rohilla

edit

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 Redirect replaced with an article. Issues over notability, verifiability and/or article name can be addressed in the usual places if anyone desires. Thryduulf (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google searches don't show a notable Indian cyclist with this name. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I can't find anybody of any nationality by this name with any connection to cycling, notable or otherwise. There is an obstetrician and gynecologist prominent in academic results but she has no connection with anything cycling-related afaict, and an amateur runner and fitness enthusiast prominent on Instragram but she doesn't appear to have posted any cycling-related content. Reeti Meenakshi Rohilla is a (presumably) Canadian journalist who has written at least two articles featuring cycling, but these are local interest stories relating to the Sioux Lookout area of Ontario, and she doesn't seem to go by only part of her name. Thryduulf (talk) 11:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Meenakshi Rohilla is the full name of Indian cyclist Meenakshi. Since she hasn’t mentioned Rohilla on her profile and has only used her first name, all the articles use Meenakshi alone.[1] But her last name is Rohilla and has been confirmed by her through her cycling collaboration. Here is the post.[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by OCDD (talk • contribs) 09:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • But without a mention in the article why would that be a reason to keep? A7V2 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      It’s not about the linked article. [Added it because it was mentioned above that they couldn’t find a cyclist with that name] It’s about her full name which will be used for her page whenever it’s made. At the moment a redirect works fine. OCDD (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Thryduulf. A7V2 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If (or when) the person is notable enough just create a page for her, this is only linked once in wikipedia under the Cycling section, I can't understand why it should be redirected to Cycling in India. there is no specific introduction about her here. Sports2021 (talk) 16:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.indiatoday.in/amp/sports/commonwealth-games-2022/story/commonwealth-games-2022-indian-cyclist-meenakshi-suffers-horrific-crash-after-being-run-over-by-rival-1982944-2022-08-02
  2. ^ https://www.instagram.com/p/C6DZ9-kqgS6/?igsh=MXRlY2RjemMxbWkzdg==
  • Comment: This has now been converted into an article. The problem is that the references that I checked do not have "Rohilla" in her name and some even have the name as "Meenakshi, Meenakshi". -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:32, 21 October 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).

Tighten

edit

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. I really don't see a consensus here. That might be disappointing given that people have suggested a WP:BARTENDER close, but even then there is reasonable disagreement over retargeting to tight vs tightness (not to mention the various keep arguments for the current target). Editors should feel free to add a hatnote to Megamind#Cast. And please don't renominate this again in 2 months. Legoktm (talk) 07:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

let's try this again... closed before with no consensus, with votes torn between... everything, really. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

for the record, my vote will be to retarget to tight cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate. Per WP:SSRT, only topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope that are commonly wikified words or that are repeatedly recreated should become soft redirects (emphases mine). This word is neither commonly wikified (indeed, there are no mainspace links that point to it), nor has it been repeatedly recreated. But because it might reasonably be a search term for multiple items on Wikipedia, and none seem like an easy primary topic, a dab page should suffice. My view has not changed since the prior discussion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I acknowledge I was pinged. Steel1943 (talk) 23:27, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Vote" added at the (current) end of this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in with a Delete vote, although I'm okay with both the idea of retargeting or hatnoting to Tight. Either way, this shouldn't stay as-is, for the extremely simple fact that anyone looking for the extremely common English verb would be heavily astonished to find themselves here-- I struggle to think of a way that Megamind, the movie, is more notable than the English language word that it references as a joke. If we stay at Megamind, it needs a hatnote. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:46, 9 October 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, CycloneYoris talk! 09:10, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

eh? seems like the consensus was to retarget this time cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:39, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely not. You can't just ignore previous !votes when a discussion is relisted. Right now this is clearly "no consensus", probably leaning towards a WP:NCRET disambiguate closure. C F A 💬 14:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, way I see it, this is headed straight for a WP:BARTENDER close. We don't have a consensus on where to go, but the Keep and Merely Hatnote votes are a quite small minority compared to Disambiguate, Retarget, and Delete combined (in sum total, the "We Can't Stay Here" vote) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
you know what? yeah, let's do all of those, at the same time. nothing is more evil than mildly confusing readers
for legal reasons, i do not actually endorse doing this, nor do i know how it would work cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Make a disambig page on another page, retarget to the disambig page, and then, after a day, delete both. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tight as the current target is surprising. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not keep. Other than not being okay with the current status quo per my stance in the previous discussion, I'm no longer a blanket "delete". Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not keep. The DAB page does not really discuss anything connected to the idea of tightening, and I don't think that target will be helpful to the reader. "Tighten" is not a conjugation of "tight" because "tight" is not a verb. I grudgingly accept that a wikt retarget is not acceptable in this case, which leaves my distant second preference to be the DAB page, much as I agree with Steel1943 on the usefulness of that page. At bare minimum, a hatnote to the DAB and/or to wikt should be added at the target. I disagree with the argument that since an SSRT is inappropriate and the DAB page is no good, we should keep it at its current baffling target. When faced with a current target that is not the PTOPIC (and search results are pretty damning) the best course of action to help the reader is to delete, instead of plumping with a bad target because it's the lesser of two weevils. Cremastra (u — c) 00:44, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either:
    Delete. Thanks to the existence of Tighten (character), this shows the current target as the first result, but will be less confusing to readers who aren't looking for the film character. Slightly preferable on balance to keeping IMO, when combined with the fact that the search engine will adapt if the situation w.r.t. this redirect changes.
    Retarget to tightness. Few things at tight can be tightened. Tightness is much better in that respect. This requires a hatnote / see also link to the current target (that admittedly might look a little stranger at tightness than at tight).
  • Those two options are the most amenable to me. Either way, there definitely isn't the fuel for a new dab page. J947 ‡ edits 03:10, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This is the classic example of where we might once have had an article before the clean up of fiction, but instead have a redirect the creator of which did not apparently consider is in reality a commonly used word with numerous different meanings. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. FOARP (talk) 09:36, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps keep with hatnote? Compare Twice, which does not refer to stuff happening two times but a K-pop group, as discussed in this RM and this MRV. The MRV also brings up Thrice, which includes such a hatnote. In principle, though, I'd rather disambiguate it, pointing it to Tight as a sort of {{R from related word}}, so if that happens, I'm fine, too. I feel that a full deletion would be unhelpful overall. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep with hatnote per Brainulator9. If there are no other encyclopedic topics that aren't just dicdefs, then leaving it with a pointer is probably fine. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maintain status quo (Keep) as a procedure per Presidentman, so as to not encourage quick renominations hoping for a different result from a different crowd. The renomination rationale had to be convincing and I didn't find it so. Jay 💬 14:39, 29 October 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).

List of swears

edit

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 with no prohibition (rather, some encouragement) to recreate this (or a similar title) with a list of lists. Legoktm (talk) 07:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No such list at the target; we shouldn't suggest readers that we do. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:46, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:18, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I'd normally recommend deletion... would it be a bad idea to simply redirect to Seven Dirty Words? It's not a list of literally all English-language profanity, but it is at least a list of some profanity. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would not be a good redirect, as that list is significantly narrower than the search term - for example it omits all non-English swear words (of which we have multiple lists). Thryduulf (talk) 02:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:14, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is why I still advocate for creating a list of lists... since we do have all those lists. Fieari (talk) 07:40, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree there is scope for some sort of list of lists, and nothing in this RfD prevents an editor from creating one, but the title of that list of lists wouldn't be "List of swears". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:09, 17 October 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).

Alicia Douvall

edit

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. Jay 💬 17:46, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect here is not appropriate as it could also redirect to Celebrity Love Island. I vote to delete the redirect to encourage article creation. Launchballer 16:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This was an article before it was turned into a redirect in 2017 and still gets 20 hits per day. Deletion would remove the history. And although her name is listed and linked in the Love Island article, what little info there is about her is in a paragraph in the Celebrity Big Brother article. Station1 (talk) 07:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 21:32, 8 October 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, CycloneYoris talk! 09:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Seems very unlikely that an article could really be created about this person who was in two episodes of a reality show, but the target page gives information about them to anyone searching the term. FOARP (talk) 10:00, 24 October 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).

Will (sociology)

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#Will (sociology)

Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic (Q2305208)

edit

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 author's request. -- Tavix (talk) 17:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per longstanding consensus, Wikidata item numbers are never plausible disambiguators (barring the as-yet-unseen circumstance where a Q# makes it into reliable sources and in turn into an article). See e.g. ongoing Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 15 § Raffaella Aleotti (Q3929201). This may have been created to address the fact that enwiki has no article to match d:Q2305208 (the RSFSR as existed from 1917–1922). The solution to that though, I think, would be to add Bolshevik Russia or another suitable redirect to that item as an intentional link to redirect. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 08:56, 17 October 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).

Valdemar Scheel Hansteen

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 24#Valdemar Scheel Hansteen

April 4, 1974

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 25#April 4, 1974

June 23, 2016

edit

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 Portal:Current events/2016 June 23. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2016 West Virginia flood does not appear to be the primary topic. Should probably be retargeted to Portal:Current events/2016 June 23. C F A 💬 02:04, 17 October 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/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_17&oldid=1261167346"