Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 15

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 00:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• England women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Australia women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Iran women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Malaysia women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kenya women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Uganda women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Poland women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Peru women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Indonesia women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Germany women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• New Zealand women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Netherlands women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bangladesh women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sri Lanka women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bhutan women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Nepal women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:RETURNTORED – these could be articles and aren't discussed at detail at the target beyond a very brief mention. Circular links from the target give the readers the illusion there are articles on these topics, and they could deceive searchers in the same way. Cremastra (u — c) 22:57, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per nom. Many of these teams are not (yet) notable so it is unlikely many of these redirects will become actual articles in the near future - so for now does more harm than good to have these as placeholder. Arnoutf (talk) 16:43, 21 January 2025 (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 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. asilvering (talk) 01:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

also potentially made up? Duckmather (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not what I would describe as a reliable source, but here's Quora claiming it was the Kazakh language word for Russia. Does have some affinity with Russia, and is the official language of the Russian Altai Republic, but doesn't appear to be remotely the primary topic in English. I'm getting mispellings of "Reeses" and "factory reset" before any mention of Russia or Kazakhs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusalkii (talk • contribs) 23:33, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. This isn't the Kazakh Wikipedia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:50, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, Ресей (Resei or Resey) is indeed Kazakh for "Russia", but it's not the primary topic in English. My first thought was this was a typo of "reset". 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:RFOR, with Kazakhstan being a former Soviet Union member creating an affinity for the topic. Fieari (talk) 23:40, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Beefaloe. Unhelpful and slightly ambiguous. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all. This is about Russia, not the Soviet Union. Jay 💬 18:00, 23 January 2025 (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 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 00:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Apparently this is the word for Asia in Polish (see wikt:azja). However, there is nothing particularly Polish about Asia (since Poland is in Europe), so I suggest deleting per WP:FORRED. Duckmather (talk) 22:49, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. This isn't the Polish Wikipedia. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:FORRED. man, poland can't even into asia... mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:20, 16 January 2025 (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 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 00:29, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• South Africa women's national kho kho team → Kho Kho World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RETURNTORED – not discussed in-depth at the current target. Cremastra (u — c) 22:49, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete' per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:48, 19 January 2025 (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 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 00:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest, Washington, D.C 20500 → White House  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Goofy and improbable search term. Only one non-WP hit on Google. WP:CHEAP, yes, but where's the line between cheap and hoarding useless things because we may as well? Cremastra (u — c) 22:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• This seems to be the Treasury's address, the White House (according to our article) is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW in Washington, D.C.. Delete, or I suppose retarget if someone feels very strongly about redirects for random gov building addresses, I don't. Rusalkii (talk) 23:37, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, even better. Cremastra (u — c) 00:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: This is indeed the Treasury's address. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 23:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ridiculous redirect. Delete per nomination. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ambivalent for this redirect. That said, I'm much more inclined to keep a simple 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest or 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue... both of which exist, but currently target the White House, and should be retargetted to United States Department of the Treasury. The full address including city and zip code does feel a bit on the implausible side to me, but WP:CHEAP does apply, so I'm ambivalent there. Fieari (talk) 07:37, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Treasury Building (Washington, D.C.) might be a better target for those. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 22:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (making no opinion about other redirects here) as it contains a somewhat implausible mistake for either potential target (WH or Treasury) due to the mismatch of street address and ZIP code: WH is at 1600 Penn NW 20500 [1]. Treasury is at 1500 Penn NW 20220 [2]. Skynxnex (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Skynxnex; standard treatment of redirects which are erroneous names of multiple things but the correct name of nothing. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 22:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Goofy nonsense. Basically vandalism by an editor that has a history of useless edits. oknazevad (talk) 02:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Skynxnex. This is a perfectly fine kind of redirect — when properly done, it unambiguously refers to a specific building, and if a building is famous, someone who doesn't know the name might copy/paste the address into the search bar as a way of finding it. But there's no good reason to keep an erroneous address redirect. Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 20 January 2025 (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 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 00:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Patricia Gosiengtian → Mad_Mad_Fun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Tricia Gosiengtian → Internet celebrity#Net Idols By Country  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned anywhere on this wiki. The mention added to Mad Mad Fun in Special:Diff/192061639 was removed in Special:Diff/192840572. The mention added to Net idol in Special:Diff/192021119 was removed in Special:Diff/192840325. The name is not listed in List of net idols either. Delete. PleaseStand (talk) 20:58, 15 January 2025 (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 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 Battle axe#China. Hog Farm _Talk 22:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Fu (weapon) → Axe  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

forgive my wording, as i can think of no classier way to say this, but judging from info found in this redirect's history, what the fuck do you mean kung fu has battle axes!? that sounds like the coolest shit ever lmao. on a less important note, the name is not mentioned in the article, though results did give me plenty of axes (some apparently ornamental or for roles not related to kung fu), so i'll actually suggest returning to red, as it seems that those axes are actually kind of notable consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget Battle axe#China, where mentioned. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:48, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Hyphenation Expert. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 03:23, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above and tag as {{R with possibilities}}, I agree it could conceivably get its own article, but for now we do have information on this weapon at the proposed target. Fieari (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2025 (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 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. asilvering (talk) 01:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

not mentioned in the target. results gave me assorted pieces of media and martial arts(?), and exactly one axe... as part of some book's cover. results for "ven mazhu" gave me a little more, which is to say i got two results related to axes, plus a duplicate of the second one consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The results I got are mostly about an axe used in Kalaripayattu. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as it doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 05:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not helpful. Jay 💬 18:03, 23 January 2025 (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 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 💬 19:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Mental health in Israel → Mental health in the Middle East  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RETURNTORED. This is clearly a notable topic on its own and the current target does not even mention Israel. Anonymous 18:06, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per nom. Fieari (talk) 12:20, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 15:41, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There's nothing useful at Health in Israel. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:52, 17 January 2025 (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 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 Tsypkin and keep the rest. Jay 💬 19:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Путин → Vladimir Putin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Навальный → Alexei Navalny  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Корчной → Viktor Korchnoi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Зеленський → Volodymyr Zelenskyy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Сталин → Joseph Stalin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Цыпкин → Alter Tsypkin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ельцин → Boris Yeltsin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Рубанов → Roman Rubanov  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Are non-English redirects of the SURNAMES really necessary? I get it when full names are redirected, and individual cases like Дудь, but this is a bit too much and definitely worth an evaluation for deletion. MimirIsSmart (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Per WP:RFOREIGN, we generally keep these, though Цыпкин should be retargeted to Tsypkin. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So you read something in an article and want to look it up in Wikipedia. But it fails because it's in Cyrillic? No, I don't think so. This sort of redirect is just as valid as redirects in Latin characters. Keep. Groogle (talk) 22:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as all obviously having an affinity with Russian. Rusalkii (talk) 23:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All of these names originate from a language using cyrillic scipts Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all per WP:RFOREIGN. These are perfectly plausible redirects because the people in question originate from countries that use Cyrillic scripts (Russia, Ukraine, etc.), and they're also the primary topics of their respective surnames. I don't see any reason to delete them. Regards, SONIC678 04:41, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep; these originals should be treated identically to their typical English representations. I agree with Elli on Tsypkin, and I would likewise suggest retargeting others, but each of the English representations is targeted to the same place as the Russian, e.g. Рубанов and Rubanov both go to Roman. Nyttend (talk) 06:06, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all as they all have clear affinity with Russian or Ukrainian, as the case may be. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 07:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all except one but it would be helpful if they were properly tagged {{R avoided double redirect}}. However, and I'm surprised others haven't noticed this, Tsypkin has no primary topic and so retarget Цыпкин to Tsypkin. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shhhnotsoloud, see Elli's similar proposal, and my vote supporting that proposal. Nyttend (talk) 03:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Tsypkin and keep the rest, and tag with {{R avoided double redirect}} per above. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 05:05, 21 January 2025 (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 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. Not seeing a consensus here. Participants are split between keeping and retargeting to the disambiguation page, at some location. The possibility of a move request for the disambiguation page has been aired as well. (non-admin closure) Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Did → Dissociative identity disorder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's not clear whether or not any primary subject has been specified. KOLANO12 3 14:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• retarget to DID (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to DID (disambiguation). 〜 Askarion ✉ 16:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Either keep or retarget to Dodecadodecahedron, whose usage of "Did" is lower-cased, whereas every other entry on the dab page uses a normal all caps acronym. If the current target is already primary for the all-caps version, then this should still point there. If you think that it's not primary, then start a move discussion to move the dab page to the base name, at which point, the redirect should target that instead. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• It seems to me that this title and DID do not differ in terms of primary topic; the abbreviation for the polyhedron is too minor to be a contender. I suppose that means keep and tag as {{R avoided double redirect}}. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 21:09, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or move DAB, there doesn't appear to be anything that uses a different capitalization per WP:DIFFCAPS so if there isn't a primary topic the DAB should be moved to the all caps base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I too can't see a different primary topic for Did or did. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• In my opinion, the primary topic would be the past tense of Do (verb). Retarget there and hatnote DID (disambiguation). -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:54, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Going to specifically oppose this target, because that is itself a redirect to Do-support, which would result in a bot fixing the double redirect. And the ultimate target is about a grammatical feature of do as an auxiliary verb, and not about the word as a whole. This would be kind of a surprising target for readers, especially being odd to search for the past tense anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I agree with the view that this and DID aren't different in terms of primary topic. Adumbrativus (talk) 01:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should retarget this to DID (disambiguation) and move the disambiguation page to DID, since I don't think it should redirect to Dissociative identity disorder. CheeseyHead (talk) 20:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to DID (disambiguation). (Moving DID (disambiguation) to DID seems to be controversial, and would probably require a move request discussion.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants are split on a primary topic for did/DID. Notified of this discussion at the suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:46, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to DAB, I don't believe the disorder has a clear claim to WP:PTOPIC status, although it may be a close call, so I can understand why others disagree-- but here's my !vote. I would not object to moving the DAB to DID without the disambiguation parenthetical. Fieari (talk) 04:48, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to DID (disambiguation), no proof that the dissociative disorder is the PTOPIC for "Did" (especially not with the common english word AND the dodecadodecahedron in the way) User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:36, 28 January 2025 (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 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 💬 19:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only redirects to its parent taxa, which is generally discouraged because it only frustrates readers with a useless article to what they want and makes it more difficult to expand the encyclopedia. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:22, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; this provides no information beyond what a Special:Search would provide, and it obstructs the creation of an article. Nyttend (talk) 06:08, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - actually it's even one step further off: this name is a synonym for Longipotamonautes reidi and should eventually redirect there, but that article does not exist yet either. In either case, redirecting to genus is not how we handle these. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:47, 19 January 2025 (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 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! 09:07, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Shells military → Shell (projectile)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While technically unambiguous, I don't think these vague redirects, formatted like Google searchterms with keywords, are very helpful. Cremastra (u — c) 14:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would military shells be more acceptable? Ladette (talk) 17:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, because it's proper grammar: [adjective] [noun]. Cremastra (u — c) 21:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 'military' could be interpreted as a disambiguation in the style of Shells (military). Seems like a plausible search term. Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:03, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:06, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CHEAP, it's a plausible shortening of the full article name as pointed out by Ca. Carguychris (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2025 (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 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 💬 19:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Coupe Dewar → Dewar Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Coupe Dewar" looks like the name of a French competition, , and I don't see any indication that the French term has been used for this American subject. That makes this redirect misleading as-is. Toadspike [Talk] 12:24, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:08, 16 January 2025 (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 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. Hog Farm _Talk 19:08, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The oldest vault → Khirokitia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Oldest vault → Khirokitia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is an unsourced claim at Vault (architecture)#Dome that the Khirokitia site has the oldest architectural vaulting. If anything, this redirect should point there, though I am skeptical that we should be supporting unsourced extraordinary claims with redirects. This redirect is also vague, since a reader might be looking for the oldest Bank vault. Toadspike [Talk] 12:11, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, the word "vault" has multiple meanings. Carguychris (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Ambiguous target, not a good DAB candidate. Fieari (talk) 07:41, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – in addition to the ambiguity and sourcing issues, I think this kind of redirect is confusing if the target article doesn't make very clear why the reader ended up there. And even the vault article currently says "Amongst the earliest known examples", not that it's the oldest one. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 05:08, 21 January 2025 (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 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. Hog Farm _Talk 19:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Positioned gun → Weapon mount  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This term is not (exactly) mentioned at the target page, and I can see it having many other possible targets, like Defensive fighting position or Three positions. Toadspike [Talk] 11:50, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; I agree with the nom's reasoning, and a review of Google Books search results revealed zero WP:RELIABLE sources that use this exact terminology, suggesting that the redirect is spurious WP:OR or WP:FANCRUFT. Carguychris (talk) 16:56, 15 January 2025 (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 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. Hog Farm _Talk 19:07, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Railroad accident lawsuits → Classification of railway accidents  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This previously pointed to several targets, including Train wreck and Lists of rail accidents, but there's nothing in them about lawsuits that could serve as an appropriate target. Suggest deletion. Paul_012 (talk) 07:42, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, there clearly needs to be an article about this topic, not a redirect targeting articles tenuously associated with it. Good example of WP:WTAF. Carguychris (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2025 (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 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. I think we can call this a recently created implausible redirect and move on. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 20:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Towergate → September 11 attacks  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention in the article. I don't think anyone will search this to see 9/11 Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The one incoming link is for the Towergate insurance company. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:23, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - far more likely to be aiming for the insurance broker with the same name. Creator has been warned for making vandal redirect before [3] and has been doing more recently, I've pinged the admin who warned them, hopefully blocked soon. BugGhost 🦗👻 18:25, 15 January 2025 (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 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. Hog Farm _Talk 19:06, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Indian Metros → Urban rail transit in India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous; a quick google suggests that this phrase is about as likely to refer to Indian metropolitan areas. Rusalkii (talk) 05:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah this ambiguity never crossed my mind while I added it. Either it can host multiple articles as a disambiguation page or it may be not necessary at all and can be removed. I'm more inclined towards removal. Footy2000♡; 06:05, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete (G7). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2025 (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 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 Bucket#Types and uses. (non-admin closure) feminist🩸 (talk) 05:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Canvas bucket → Bucket  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not mentioned in the article or in canvas. results seem torn on defining it as a bucket, a purse, a bucket pretending to be a purse, a purse predending to be a bucket, and a hat consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 17:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep They are not rare in boats, as a space saving collapsible device, or for fire-fighting (probably not these days). They certainly could be mentioned. Johnbod (talk) 17:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  So mention them, but otherwise, this is misleading, as it takes a reader to a page with no information about the topic. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no mention of anything specific to canvas at the target. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The phrase seems to have mentions on 7 different articles, with the Canvas and Bucket not being on that list. None of the 7 articles seem to be good retargeting options for this redirect either. WP:REDLINK seems to be the best way to go at the present time. Steel1943 (talk) 19:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RETURNTORED to encourage article creation, per Johnbod's argument above. Fieari (talk) 05:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, a page where a canvas bucket is shown being used is a helpful location for a redirect. Now described on the page. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 23:03, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've also added a cited entry for canvas buckets on the list. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 23:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts now that it's mentioned in the target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:07, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• eh... weak keep. admittedly, i'm not entirely sure with how much readers would be looking for the other definitions, but until someone decides to look for something on them, i guess it's fine to keep there for now consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:25, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or possibly refine to Bucket#Types and uses now that a mention has been added. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Mention exists. There's not a lot to say about canvass buckets, but we have something, so may as well send the user there to get it. Fieari (talk) 06:50, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to Bucket#Types and uses, where there is a reliably-sourced mention, which is better than nothing. Hog Farm _Talk 19:09, 22 January 2025 (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 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 to CURRENTYEAR. Jay 💬 07:31, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:CURRENT YEAR → Template:CURRENTISOYEAR  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is one space away from the magic word {{CURRENTYEAR}}. But it redirects to {{CURRENTISOYEAR}}, which apparently uses a calendar system where the year is currently 2025. Four of the five template-space usages seemed to be erroneous: [4] [5] [6] [7]. I have no opinions on retargeting vs replacing the remaining usage and deleting, but as-is, I think this is an entirely unnecessary footgun. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Mdaniels5757: As of this comment, this redirect has 179 transclusions, not just the 1 in the template space. (I found a few where {{CURRENT YEAR}} is hardcoded in the article itself.) Best solution here to avoid anything breaking is to replace all transclusions with either the current target or the proposed target prior to this discussion being closed. Steel1943 (talk) 00:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I was fast enough with my stealth edit. Guess not! :) That sounds good to me. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757: You were! I had an edit conflict, but I had to add "in the template space" to my comment after rereading your comment. Either way though, the nominated redirect is hardcoded in some articles, so the transclusions will have to be reevaluated after any of the pages which transclude the templates you edited are purged. Steel1943 (talk) 00:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I've been going through remaining usage and almost all of these are fundamental abuse of how "as of" statement works, as if a dated statement will simultaneously always be true?? Very strange. These should all be removed, and I'm doing so. The one valid usage I've found, for a dynamic x-in-year title, would not work with CURRENTISOYEAR. So, since we can't redirect to a magic word, convert to wrapper for {{CURRENTYEAR}}. Or redirect to {{CURRENTYEAR}} (the template, that is), and change that to <includeonly>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</includeonly><noinclude>{{soft|mw:CURRENTYEAR}}</noinclude>. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 07:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Nominator comment) I think Tamzin's last solution ("redirect to {{CURRENTYEAR}} (the template, that is), and change that to <includeonly>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</includeonly><noinclude>{{soft|mw:CURRENTYEAR}}</noinclude>.") is probably the best way forward. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Mdaniels5757 and Tamzin: Can I close this RfD, and you can take your time to handle the transclusions? Jay 💬 13:30, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jay: Sounds good. The transcluding articles will be no worse with it retargeted anyways; the issue with them is tangential to the redirect issue. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 18:36, 26 January 2025 (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 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 💬 19:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Black Bean Episiode → Mier expedition  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

An implausible typographic error; very few pageviews of the last several years and I cannot find evidence in the wild that "Black Bean Episiode" is a commonly used incorrect spelling for the historical event. The correctly spelled Black Bean Episode already exists. Hog Farm _Talk 01:51, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, highly implausible, very few occurrences of "episiode" throughout all of wiki. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:31, 16 January 2025 (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 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. Hog Farm _Talk 21:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• PLL-01 → WAC-21  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Noting that the page in question had been at the title of "PLL-01" for 10 years before it was moved by one user yesterday, tagged as an R from move. Name of "PLL-01" listed in lede for 10 years up until yesterday. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:32, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep - 10 years at a location is quite long enough to attract external links, not to mention, a user might have seen it previously at that page, remember the former name, and look for it that way. The move was done because the "PLL-01 name is not verified" but no discussion appears on the talk page. Perhaps the relevant WikiProject should be notified and the correct name discussed amongst people who have knowledge about military equipment (ie, not me)? Fieari (talk) 23:53, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep per Fieari. There are currently ten mainspace links to this page, and just one of them — 155 mm caliber — has had more than 100 revisions since a link to PLL-01 was added in late 2023. That's over 100 URLs with links to PLL-01, and thus over 100 links would be broken by deleting this URL. Such links should only be deleted temporarily (e.g. G6 speedy) or deleted because of egregious problems, which this isn't. Nyttend (talk) 03:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per all. I do not know why RovingPersonalityConstruct did the move since there are multiple references on Wikipedia linking PLL-01 to WAC-21. Jay 💬 20:00, 22 January 2025 (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 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 Ponting Bridges. Jay 💬 20:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Ponting Engineering Bureau → Viktor Markelj  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

None of the following terms/phrases are stated at the target: "Ponting Engineering Bureau", "Ponting Engineering", "Engineering Bureau", or "Bureau". Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it should be redirected to Ponting Bridges instead. I believe Ponting Consulting Engineers Ltd, Ponting Engineering Bureau, Ponting Engineering and other translations are all the same. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 04:57, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: This page was BLAR'd by Jeraxmoira yesterday and existed for 5 months prior. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Ponting Bridges (Ponting inženirski biro d.o.o. 'Ponting engineering office plc'). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:13, 18 January 2025 (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).