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, G7. by User:Anthony_Bradbury Lenticel ^(talk) 00:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedysta:Bayyal/brudnopis → Zofia Praussowa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Improbable search term Vexations (talk) 21:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete — As the editor who moved the page, I endorse the deletion of the redirect.

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. The close of the AfD specifically cited the argument that this article was a fork, so it's reasonable (especially given the plethora of merge !votes) that this redirect exist, especially per WP:ATD-R. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:29, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Recognition of eSports as a form of legitimate sports → eSports#Classification as a sport  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete and salt. We just deleted this page via AfD on account of its being a badly written advocacy essay that adds no value to WP; recreation of the title as a redirect is just continuing the advocacy and POINTY. Jytdog (talk) 19:52, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and salt as proposed. The fact that this was created so quickly (barely over 2 days) after it was deleted per AfD consensus suggests that this is going to be a problem article if not nipped in the bud.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:00, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't know what the article looked like, and it doesn't really matter to me; this seems like a concept readers are likely to search, and one where we must resort to a descriptive title, since there's no one obvious name they could search for. If there are concerns with disruption, e.g., attempts to recreate the article, the page could be semi-protected. --BDD (talk) 19:06, 6 April 2018 (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 Flight Risk (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 05:14, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Flight risk → Flight Risk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I suggest conversion to a dab page or creation of an article or redirecting to something to do with the assessment of the risk of someone fleeing from the law (e.g., Bail in the United States, which discusses flight risk in several places in the article). I think there is no way that "flight risk" primarily refers to a particular rap album. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:30, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate There's also a CSI Miami episode with such a name, then it can refer to Wiktionary. The general Bail article doesn't list it though but the United States one does. Flight risk is also a term used in hospitals for patients who leave without checking out, and for employees who could leave a company, although perhaps under the original definitions of the bail (can't tell right away, would have to research the phrase's origins). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:40, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've created Flight Risk (disambiguation), so this can redirect there or assume the title. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC) updated 05:57, 4 April 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• A word → Word  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

With the word "A" at the beginning, this phrase can also refer to the subject in Conversation. Steel1943 (talk) 16:56, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Nominator comment/update: Per the below, "disambiguate" seems useful compared to the current situation. Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep To discourage abusive recreation given more juvenile uses of the phrase. Smartyllama (talk) 20:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• "Delete and salt" would be preferred with such a concern to prevent retargeting or keeping it pointing where it does. Steel1943 (talk) 21:58, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dabify per AnguWOOF given the multiple uses. Smartyllama (talk) 12:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate A (word) exists to handle the English articles of "a" and "an". Then there's The A Word. Also seems to be a typo for some foreign language based "Aword". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify per AngusWOOF --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate: From 2007 to 2015 this page redirected to a specific naughty word, which is a legitimate interpretation and also the first meaning I think of when someone refers to "the A word". Some anonymous IP redirected it to "word" in 2015 without giving a reason; perhaps the user told the Wikipedia search engine to return "a word" and the response was displeasing. Since there are multiple interpretations of "A word" in English, a disambiguation page would be most appropriate, and Wikipedia is not censored. --Closeapple (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Relevant past discussions: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 24#Q word, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 24#T word. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The main difference since the previous discussions is the addition of The A Word television series in 2016, so previous entries were fairly weak for a dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:02, 5 April 2018 (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 Healthy food. Are drinks food? Category:Food and drink says no! But healthy food lists both healthy diet and health food, each of which contains material on drinks. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Healthy drinks → Drink  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The use of the word "healthy" in this redirect is too specific to a point where whatever subject this redirect is meant to describe will not be found in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 16:34, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there isn't even a health drink AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as vague per nom. Note that Healthy food is a thing so a future dab or article might be plausible --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to healthy food, noting that some people consume nothing but juice and consider that a healthy diet. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 02:48, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Retarget per Ivan - Had juice fasting not existed this would've been a delete however Ivan has a point readers could consider that article a health drink .... so as such consider this a very weak retarget. –Davey2010^Talk 20:47, 3 April 2018 (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. Unopposed and overbroad. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Food safety scandal → Food safety#Incidence  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target is not specifically about a scandal, and there doesn't seem to be a subject specific enough in existence to retarget this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Safe-to-eat → Food  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The present target seems incorrect, but the best alternative target that I can find, Food safety, is not specifically about eating the food. Steel1943 (talk) 16:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Is it widely used? Sounds like a neologism, in contrast to ready-to-eat. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:41, 3 April 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:15, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Apparently, this term is ambiguous. Per research, it could refer to Food or Drink. Steel1943 (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Wiktionary as WP:FORRED. No particular brand of this either. Spanish Wikipedia has a Wiktionary of it, not an article or redirect es:Ingesta AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:45, 2 April 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:14, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The target is such a common word that the misspelling, as represented by the redirect, is unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Plausible typo, though unlikely someone would think that's how it's actually spelled. Smartyllama (talk) 16:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  ...So, it's plausible, but it's not? Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's plausible [1] [2] [3] It's also used for non-notable businesses. [4] [5] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's plausible that someone would accidentally spell it that way, if they enter an extra o by mistake. It's not plausible that someone would deliberately spell it that way, believing it really does have three o's, but that's not required for a redirect. Smartyllama (talk) 12:57, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Typos shouldn't be a redirect especially when they're as silly as this, Food is food no matter how many f's and o's and d's you add on. –Davey2010^Talk 17:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I think it's plausible enough. The redirect received decent usage over the last year, even topping 5 hits on 9/29/17. Piada Italian Street Foood is another example of the typo. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:26, 10 April 2018 (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 Electricity generation. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Sources of Power Production → Electric power  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It doesn't seem that the reader will find what they are looking for if looking up the redirect in the redirect's current state. Probably best to delete. Steel1943 (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Power production redirects to Electricity generation. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:30, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to electricity generation, noting that in the context of producing power, especially from a source, it is most common for power to be a synonym for electricity. Yes, other kinds of power can be produced from various sources, but it's unlikely that's what a reader typing this is looking for. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:51, 3 April 2018 (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 Electronics industry. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 05:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The subject of the target article is not about the subject of the redirect (an industry). Steel1943 (talk) 16:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Electronics industry. There are some cases where some news articles, books, magazines, and websites have the i capitalized. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:45, 3 April 2018 (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 List of electronics brands. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 13:06, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Electronic company → Electronics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target article does not pertain to a subject about a company. Steel1943 (talk) 16:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of electronics brands as being slightly more useful. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:30, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Angus as best option. Electronic business is definitely not right, and electronics isn't a help. It's old and the list might be of some use. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:38, 10 April 2018 (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 Fish and chips. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 05:02, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Fush and chups → New Zealand English  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Propose retarget to Fish and chips (with a possible refinement to #Cultural impact) where the New Zealand pronunciation is discussed. It's not mentioned at New Zealand English, so the current target is not helpful, but I got reverted so here we are. Another advantage of retargeting to "fish and chips" is that the redirect can also be a ((R from misspelling)), unlike the current target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:01, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget as above. I've added a news article that covers it. If editors insist it stay in New Zealand English then they should add that to the article somewhere. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:24, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The discussion is actually at New Zealand English phonology, which presumably was spun off from the main NZE page at some point. Hongooi (talk) 23:02, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per above - It's on the NV Gov website and there's plenty of search results for it too - Plausible search term however fish & chips would make more sense as a target, –Davey2010^Talk 20:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget as proposed, as that's the only logical way of doing it. Schwede66 10:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. As an analogy, the current setup is akin to redirecting profane words to Profanity or examples of emoji to Emoji, which are equally as helpful. Steel1943 (talk) 11:53, 4 April 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:34, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Northern Mindanao Broadcasting System → DXNS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect to a DAB page. A search suggested that there may be enough material for an article. Indeed, one of the entries on the first Google page linked to Course Hero, an essay bank (I'm not suggesting that that's in any way WP:RS, but that is suggestive of notability). I propose deletion to encourage article creation. Narky Blert (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to List of analog television stations in the Philippines It does own some stations, but not sure how notable the company is outside of that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:10, 27 March 2018 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• List of titular Catholic sees (B-K) → List of Catholic titular sees  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Deletion; serves no purpose whatsoever. RAVENPVFF | talk ~ 07:37, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Old merged article. I see no problem with retaining the redirect. Chicbyaccident (talk) 09:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Why is this particular redirect being singled out over all the other similar redirects targeting List of Catholic titular sees? -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:03, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since the nom couldn't be bothered to answer my query, keep. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Would've said "weak" if there hadn't been a merge, though I doubt this would've been created in that case. Very unlikely as a search term, but could be on someone's old bookmarks or something. What clinches it for me is that the redirect isn't misleading—readers truly will find titular Catholic sees B-K at the target article. --BDD (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2018 (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.