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. General consensus to keep. (non-admin closure) feminist 13:37, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:RFOREIGN not a French-related topic. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to French passport as likely topic as it is prominently used in the descriptions there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @AngusWOOF: There are other French-speaking countries and there is no specific reason to prefer French passport to Canadian passport, Malian passport, etc. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:35, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps set it up as a "redirects here" with hatnotes to Canadian passport and List of passports for the general list. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:42, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Isn't this a plausible ((R from misspelling))? – Uanfala 20:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate as "French passport" and "passport" are plausible entries. The "Wiktionary" template should be also added. Otherwise, I do not object to deletion as Wikipedia is neither a search engine (despite having our own search engine) nor a dictionary. --George Ho (talk) 01:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it's a french word but many countries speak french and this word is on their passports or passeports. French is the language of diplomacy after all. Legacypac (talk) 07:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, not unreasonable per Legacypac. —Kusma (t·c) 14:47, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but maybe add a hatnote to List of passports at the top, which would be helpful to many readers in general. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I've expanded the hatnote at Passport to link to List of passports as per Patar knight, that is likely to be useful to many readers in general whatever happens to this redirect (about which I have no strong opinion). Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely capitalization for the plural form of "Crank". The redirect does not seem to be a stylization of any subject on the target disambiguation page Crank. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom as effort was made to see if stylization was appropriate. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:20, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this was a ((R from CamelCase)) created in 2002, we generally don't delete these. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Compared to its target, the redirect is not CamelCase. If it was, the redirect's target would be titled "Crank S" (with a space.) This redirect was created by what seems to be a malfunctioning bot. Steel1943 (talk) 15:30, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as an ((R with old history)) per Champion. user:Conversion script was neither a malfunctioning bot, nor the author of this redirect - see the user page for details, it was originally created by Larry Sanger on 6 February 2001 (when Wikipedia was less than a month old) [1] as an article which has evolved into today's Crank (person). In the very early days all Wikipedia articles had to have at least three letters, the first and (third or greater) being capital letters, so one-word titles conventionally had the last letter capitalised, e.g. CrankS rather than Cranks (why the plural form and not CranK I don't know, but it's quite likely that pre-dated the article titling policy - the oldest version of nostalgia:Naming conventions dates from November 2001, but that likely isn't the earliest version). There was no way to distinguish between what would today be "Cranks" and "Crank S" as both would be camelcase CrankS. Cranks redirects to Crank, so we could also class this as ((R avoided double redirect)). Thryduulf (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  "user:Conversion script was neither a malfunctioning bot..." The bot's block log tells a different story. Steel1943 (talk) 18:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Those blocks were in 2006, the edit it made to this redirect was in 2002. It was not malfunctioning at the time. Thryduulf (talk) 23:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, ((R from CamelCase)) to the target of Cranks. —Kusma (t·c) 21:27, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• KeeP per ((R from CamelCase)). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 NetScaler. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Netscaler → Citrix Systems#Products  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Please can this be retargeted to NetScaler? The redirect was originally created before the NetScaler article existed; now that the page exists, it seems most logical to move the retarget this redirect. Please note that I have a COI as I am making this request on behalf of Citrix as part of my work at Beutler Ink. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:50, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nomintor, a perfectly normal ((R from other capitalisation)) or ((R from incorrect capitalisation)). Thryduulf (talk) 20:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. No other companies or products that refer to this spelling version. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:36, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy retarget per Thryduulf as obvious. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 Centreville, New Brunswick#Education. (non-admin closure) feminist 07:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Centreville Community School → Centreville, New Brunswick  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect about a non-notable elementary school. Capitals00 (talk) 14:15, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This is a pretty typical way of handling such schools. See WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. --BDD (talk) 19:17, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Discussed as the main school in Centreville, New Brunswick#Education. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to Centreville, New Brunswick#Education per AngusWOOF. Thryduulf (talk)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. Ruslik_Zero 20:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hinduism in American Samoa → Demographics of American Samoa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Since the 56,000 people in American Samoa are Christian 98.3% Other 1% Unaffiliated 0.7% and no mention of Hindus, this is a misleading redirect. Legacypac (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. If the stat for "Other" mentions Hindus then reconsider. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Anyone who knows anything about religion will learn from our page that Hinduism comprises at most 1% of American Samoa through this redirect. This is also not a purely academic question. Representative Tulsi Gabbard for example, is a prominent American politician who was born to a Hindu mother in American Samoan and is herself Hindu, the first to be elected to the House of Representatives. [2] ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good find, but she lives in Hawaii so that does not show there is a Hindu community in American Samoa. Further, the 1% includes muslims, jews, and every other non-Christian religion, so you don't really learn there are upnto 1% Hindus in the 560 Other people. Legacypac (talk) 02:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a find. Tulsi Gabbard was a moderately prominent figure in the last American presidential election. Your second sentence is 100% false. As long as you know that Hinduism is a religion and that it's not a Christian religion, you learn that up to 1% of the population of American Samoa is Hindu. That's what "up to" means, possibly but probably not entirety, but some part of that one percent. As long as you have a basic understanding of religion and math, you're learning basically everything there is to know about Hinduism in American Samoa. --- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 06:02, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We are not all Americans. Claiming up to 1%, while theoretically in a way correct is very misleading. The number is more likely to be closer to or actually 0. Legacypac (talk) 06:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also Hinduism in the United States is about 1% so in AS it's even less. Legacypac (talk) 06:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct, neither of us are Americans. It's not "theoretically in a way correct", it is correct using the information given. The Hindu population in American Samoa is at most 1%. It could be zero, but it's not above 1%, and regardless of the precise measurement, it's an insignificant population, which should satisfy those use this search term. I added material from the main American Samoa page which provide alternative religious breakdowns, which further emphasize the point that any permanent Hindu population is at best small, if any. It might be an issue if the "Other" percentage was very large, bu that's not the case here. This RFD shouldn't primarily turn on whether or not there are Hindus in American Samoa. It should turn on how likely of a search term it is, which based on how Hinduism is a major world religion, and other factors (e.g. proximity to Fiji and other SEA countries with Hindu populations, coverage of Tulsi Gabbard, etc.). ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:38, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This redirect is misleading as someone using this redirect will not learn anything about Hinduism in American Samoa. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per everything said in previous discussions of this dismal set of redirects. I appreciate Patar knight's reasoning, but this is an effective invitation for readers to perform WP:OR-style inferences that we wouldn't dream of putting into the article ourselves. – Uanfala 23:23, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. Ruslik_Zero 20:14, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hinduism in Albania → Religion in Albania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previously not dealt with here. There is no mention of Hinduism at the target. Further the detailed info at the target and the demographics of Albania suggest there is not a large enough group of hindus in the country to warrant discussion. Hinduism_by_country#By_region Europe-Balkans section says the entire region has 449 Hindus/0.001% of population. Some of the Hinduism in X redirects could be sent to the country page, but not this one. Legacypac (talk) 08:06, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Not listed in the "by country" list. Hinduism in Balkans and Hinduism in Croatia can go to Hinduism_by_country#By_region AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC) updated 19:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The religious demography section includes a percentage for "Other religions" which includes Hinduism. Indians definitely work in Albania [3] and the INdian government claims that there are 70 Indians nationals in Albania as of December 2016.[4] ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 07:12, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this is about Hindus and many Indians are Christians, Muslims and other faiths. Legacypac (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete since there is no mention of Hinduism at the target. Sure, there is an "other" category in the statistics, but we cannot assume it includes Hinduism. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:58, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per previous discussions, unless the target is expanded with relevant content that explicitly talks about Hinduism. – Uanfala 23:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• National Indie Excellence Awards → Vanity award  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

National Indie award is not mentioned at the target page. And it sounds like marking it as a vanity award is an opinion rather than a fact (though I guess I feel that way about listing any awards on the vanity page...). ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 13:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:G8 and WP:G10 - simply a backended way of labelling these awards as a vanity award, a derogatory label in this context. Originally targeted Vanity Award, a page which never existed. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non-notable award. [5] created by Smarketing Inc. and founder Ellen Reid (not the musician) who also created the Beverly Hills Book Awards and Body, Mind, and Spirit Book Awards. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - while certainly an utterly non-notable award, it appears that "National Indie Excellence Awards" and "Indie Excellence Awards" are synonymous, and the latter is mentioned on the target page. And calling it a vanity award, using the definition on the target page, seems pretty spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The link for the Indie Excellence Award in the Vanity awards article is out of date, so it doesn't explain that it is a vanity award. Can you find another news source that categorizes it as a vanity award? Having links to the rules of the award leads to original research / synth. For example, here's Salon's assessment of National Book Foundation's National Book Awards. [6] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:57, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another article by Publishers Weekly [7] and a discussion by New York Times on vanity publishers [8] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 disambiguate.

• Disambiguate Fideo
• Redirect Fideos to Fideo

(non-admin closure) feminist 07:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Fideo → Noodle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fideos → Noodle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Though these words have become more known with English speakers through the recent years, as it stands, the redirects are not mentioned at the target article, they are WP:FORRED (Spanish: wikt:fideo). (Note: Fideo is a ((R from history)). The page was redirected to Noodle as the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fideo.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:16, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there isn't a List of Spanish ingredients as with List of Japanese ingredients that would attract the non-English terms. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Nominator comment: Forgot to do a bit of WP:BEFORE ... before nominating this. Long story short, and article by the name Fideo, Syria exists. (Pinging AngusWOOF in case this changes any part of their comment.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:45, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dabify Ugh, good point. There are multiple Fideos that could be used as a disambiguation and the Syrian city isn't primary topic even though it has an article. Some people use it as a nickname, and then there's Fideo 9 channel, and Samu Castillejo is nicknamed El Fideo and Ángel Di María is nicknamed Fideo. There's also Sopa de fideo and List_of_noodle_dishes#Spanish / Vermicelli. Characters in Once Upon a Time in Mexico and Inazuma Eleven named Fideo. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Dabify per the findings discussed above, though I think a fair argument could be made that sopa de fideo and fideo seco are primary topics (see this link for more info on fideo seco). -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Entry created. As there aren't really that many entries per section, that can be removed if desired. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 converted to a disambiguation page. Thryduulf (talk) 18:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• United States military occupation → United States Armed Forces  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect was incorrectly nominated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States military occupation, where none of the !voters except one applied WP:RNEUTRAL, and alternative redirect targets and outcomes for the page were not considered.

This could be retargeted to List of military occupations, where tables are sortable by occupying nation. Or this could be turned into a page with links to the aforementioned list and maybe United_States_Armed_Forces#Personnel, which would discuss a "United States military occupation" in the context of a job, or Military history of the United States to capture instances which might not be listed at the list. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @Garuda28, PohranicniStraze, Rockypedia, Jeff in CA, and Carrite: Pinging participants in the AFD. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - "Military occupation", as a phrase, has a specific meaning so strong that directing it toward specific jobs (i.e. Military occupational specialties) would be misleading the readers, even if some militaries do talk about "occupational specialties." Anmccaff (talk) 01:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The occupational codes is a good link to have on a possible page. I've drafted such a page below the redirect. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:33, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Dabify and keep the draft page created by Patar knight. Nice work. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I really like that draft, and I feel that with a term that can mean so much its probably the best way to do that. Garuda28 (talk) 19:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I too really like the draft article. and I think we should go with it. Jeff in CA (talk) 06:20, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since this redirect is becoming more of a Wikipedia:Disambiguation page, how should we proceeded?Garuda28 (talk) 17:40, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.