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

The result of the discussion was delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:36, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Saif Nabel(Signer) → Saif Nabel (singer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible/unnecsasary search term typo ("singer" misspelled as "signer") --Animalparty! (talk) 21:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, makes sense to me. The lack of a space before the left parenthesis is also an issue. PKT(alk) 21:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I expect that this will be a unanimous decision. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:54, 16 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 delete. --BDD (talk) 20:21, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This small feature isn't mentioned on the generically broad target, it is not even a settlement according to OS, just a feature, it doesn't show up in the suggestions but it does exist never the less and there is a Commons cat. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Windsole is a (small) habitation and place name, but in Perthshire? Maybe there are two, but searching in Aberdeenshire doesn't turn up much. Lithopsian (talk) 20:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it appears that there is one near Auchterarder as well, but we don't have any mention either of them. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which means disambiguation isn't suitable. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:07, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no suitable target exists. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:41, 20 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 soft redirect to Wikt:practicable. Killiondude (talk) 01:58, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Implausible redirect Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 19:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:NOTDICT. Still, it could be redirected to Wiktionary. Lithopsian (talk) 19:18, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Soft Wiktionary this There's a difference between practical and practicable [1] with practicable being closer to feasible or practice. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:24, 14 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 restore previous content. Killiondude (talk) 06:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Virtual Skipper 5: 32nd America's Cup: The Game → Nadeo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Only information about this topic is a minor entry in a very long list, no reader would have any gain from this redirect. Lordtobi (✉) 18:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore per WP:BLAR. This was an article for a decade before being redirected without consensus last month. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:12, 12 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 What Tavix said. Not certain the article needs to exist, but BLARing it to Ubisoft isn't helpful. If it's to be deleted, let AfD have it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:27, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Jacques Villeneuve's Racing Vision → Ubisoft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Speed Challenge → Ubisoft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Speed Challenge: Jacques Villeneuve's Racing Vision → Ubisoft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not in target article. Lordtobi (✉) 18:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - "Speed Challenge" appears to be a possible reference to a bunch of real-life sporting events, particularly those around auto racing. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore Speed Challenge: Jacques Villeneuve's Racing Vision per WP:BLAR, retarget Jacques Villeneuve's Racing Vision there, and delete Speed Challenge as vague. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:28, 20 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 retarget to Great Britain Bandy Federation. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Littleport Ice Stadium → Littleport, Cambridgeshire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target article does not mention subject. It did once but it was removed. SpinningSpark 11:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs a section on facilities. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:17, 21 February 2018 (UTC).[reply]

That may be so, but the Ice Stadium was removed on the grounds that it does not exist and there are no submitted plans to build it. If you think the editor that did that is wrong, then fine, reinsert the material. Otherwise there is no point to the redirect. SpinningSpark 17:02, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or retarget. The project does exist as a proposal or idea, and seems to have got a bit of press attention, so I don't see why it isn't worth a single sentence in the Littleport article. But if there's a consensus that it doesn't belong there, then retarget to Fen skating#Bundy, which includes a sentence that mentions the project (though until I edited it just now it didn't mention it by name). – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:40, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Great Britain Bandy Federation, the organisation that is (supposedly) building the stadium. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:25, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Tavix, seems reasonable and likely to be useful to someone. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:18, 24 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 flora/fauna, delete rest. No consensus to retarget ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:20, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Animal and plant → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animal or plant → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animal, plant, and fungus → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animal, plant, or fungus → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animals and plants → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animals, plants, and fungi → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Animals, plants, or fungi → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fauna and flora → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Flora and fauna → Organism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete all per WP:XY. In addition to the WP:XY issue, these redirects could be considered confusing as they represent a group of subtopics that redirect to their parent topic; to compare, a redirect like Spain and Greece doesn't exist to target Europe or Country, and Atlanta and Madrid doesn't target City. Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment On the Flora page lead paragraph, it says that flora, fauna and fungi are collectively referred to as biota which redirects to Life. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:14, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @AngusWOOF: FWIW, the link on Flora is actually Biota (taxonomy). Biota is a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 19:32, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the last two (Fauna and flora and Flora and fauna) due to incoming links, though I am not adverse to a retarget if there is a better article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I looked at a few of those incoming links; a good number of them either hint that either there is a missing article (WP:REDLINK), or that the two words Flora and Fauna should be linked separately, most being the latter. Steel1943 (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  That's out of my topic area, but I would expect these two to redirect to the same target as Biota (ecology). – Uanfala (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  The current target of Biota (ecology) is Biome, and that doesn't seems like an appropriate target for the redirects since the subject of Biome is to life/flora/fauna like Continent is to Country or City. Steel1943 (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Flora and fauna is a widely used term so that should be kept. The other combinations, not so much. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the last 2. I just searched for 'flora and fauna' and found this RfD. Common phrase that should #R to something, and Organism seems like a good target.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  04:25, 13 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 delete. --BDD (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Rhives → Highland (council area)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This place isn't mentioned on this generic target, it appears to be in the civil parish of Kilmuir Easter but there is no article there and Scottish CPs appear to have limited recognition. Note that there 2 other features with this name, presumably non notable. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:38, 20 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 delete. --BDD (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Rhireavach → Highland (council area)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This place doesn't even show up on Gegraph search but Google returns Ruigh' riabhach, the current target is far too broad anyway. This is part of a number of possible problematic redirects, see User:Sjorford/PrimroseGuy redirects. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:37, 20 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 delete. --BDD (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Rhyd-lydan → Conwy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are 2 features in Wales called "Rhyd-lydan", 1 in Carmarthenshire and 1 in Powys, there are also 2 settlements called "Rhydlydan", 1 in Conwy and the other in Powys, there is also another feature called "Rhydlydan" in Ceredigion[2]. As there is no articles on either, with the different names, this is a WP:X or Y redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 15:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Set-indexify? e.g. we've got a whole Category:Set indices on populated places in Russia, even in cases where every locality by that name is a redlink (WP:SETNOTDAB is the justification for this practice, I guess). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:42, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A set index is possible, but if every entry is a redlink it does beg the question of whether the set index itself should exist. Unlike a redirect page, a set index is an article and needs to meet WP:GNG, in its own way. In this case, there are two non-redlink targets available but neither of them actually mention the name. Lithopsian (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If there is nowhere that mentions these places, a set index would not make sense. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:36, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If the only notable items are the 2 Rhydlydans then it doesn't make sense to have a set index, hatnotes will do anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:14, 21 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 delete. --BDD (talk) 20:17, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ystrad-ffyn → Carmarthenshire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This appears to be an alternative name for Ystradffin[3] which is in the community of Llanfair-ar-y-bryn but as there is no article at Ystradffin or redirect to Llanfair-ar-y-bryn, this one should probably be deleted as its possible that it might not even be for this place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete plausible redirect target would be Ystradffin if that gets created. Until then, redirect makes no sense. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that "Ystrad-ffyn" is an alternative name for Ystradffin, considering how obscure even Ystradffin is, it may not be. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no suitable target exists. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:38, 20 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 delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:09, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Trash metal → Thrash metal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Vandals abuse this typo redirect to make low-key vandal edits to bands or recordings they deem to be terrible or "trash". The term doesn't show up int he target article. This is not helpful to Wikipedia. A "did you mean" when discovering the page doesn't exist suffices. dannymusiceditor ^{Speak up!} 14:49, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- as far as I can tell right now it's meant to be a redirect from a typo. But, I am sure there are bands that call their music 'trash metal,' because genres are arbitrary and people call themselves whatever they want and fans follow. In any case, I think having nothing is better than having a redirect to an article which is unrelated. This typo may have an actual meaning, so having a redirect is unhelpful imo. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 15:07, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Trash per El Cid; that's a pretty good explanation of how this redirect could be astonishing and/or confusing. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The newest generation is using the word "Trash" to describe something they feel is bad. They are abusing the typo redirect in order to put a joke in. AmericanAir88 (talk) 20:55, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and SALT the title. Legacypac (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Did you know this page hadn't been patrolled for 14 years? So weird. The editing history is the most confusing that I've ever seen and directs to...where? It only muddies the waters of those searching and should be deleted. Barbara ✐  ✉ 12:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt not plausible search term, just a way for vandals to cause trouble. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:39, 15 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 delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:10, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Richard o'hammond → Richard Hammond  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very implausible search term, for obvious reasons. Thegreatluigi (talk) 14:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- unless there is some alternate name of his I'm missing. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 15:08, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - not apparently a nickname or alternative name. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:26, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete searches point to a non-notable Richard O. Hammond AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:28, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete he's not known by this name ever. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:40, 15 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 delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Armee d l´Air de l´Armistice → Vichy France  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Armee d l'Air de l'Armistice → Vichy France  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo, even in French. Correct spelling is Armée de l'air de l'Armistice. Place Clichy (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, target should be the slightly more specific Vichy French Air Force, aka Armée de l'air de Vichy. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both - implausible typos. Note that the target of both should be Vichy French Air Force, there was a bot error that caused the pages to target Vichy France Although the first redirect is tagged ((R from move)), it is not an old move of the Air Force article which was created later; I don't know what's going on there. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:33, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivanvector: That's what happened, put short, from this page history:

• 00:55, 6 March 2007 : Good faith user Torb37 (now blocked) creates a poorly written, poorly formatted, poorly titled article at Armee d l´Air de l´Armistice
• 20:21, 12 March 2007‎ : Med moved Armee d l´Air de l´Armistice to Armée de l'air de l'armistice
• 20:23, 12 March 2007‎ : Med moved Armée de l'air de l'armistice to Armée de l'air de l'Armistice
• 02:47, 29 April 2007‎ : Smith Jones redirects Armée de l'air de l'Armistice to Vichy Regime, following PROD (rightfully so)
• 02:06, 31 July 2007‎ : MoRsE starts the current article at Vichy French Air Force

Hence the misleading R from move, the wrong targets, and the horribly spelled redirect not worth keeping imho. Place Clichy (talk) 17:02, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! Thanks for that. These probably fall under WP:G8 then, as pages that should have been deleted when their original target was soft-deleted. No harm in having a discussion, though. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:10, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both per nom Legacypac (talk) 21:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both as implausible typos. Someone competent enough in French to be searching in French wouldn't ordinarily make these typos. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:41, 15 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 delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:37, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Stupid Missile Crisis → North Korea–United States relations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be inspired by a Chris Hayes tweet or a Daily Kos article that appeared around the same time and coincides with the creation of this redirect. I don't really think that is enough to establish notability/standing. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 04:31, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- If it is a notable term, create an article for it. Assuming its not notable enough, having it redirect to what it references is not helpful. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 15:10, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - vague. All missile crises are stupid. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom or if we must keep, retarget to Donald J. Trump Legacypac (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as pointless creation. –Davey2010^Talk 00:05, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:NOTNEO as "Covfefe Missile Crisis". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:29, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete just a joke search term. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:42, 15 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 delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:38, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The redirect is ambiguous because the target is/was never a former version of itself. If it is formerly anything, it is formerly part of current-day Korea. Steel1943 (talk) 23:42, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the hatnote mentions a Later Baekje so this might be a useful term or perhaps Earlier Baekje instead? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete since no one has advanced any reason to keep this. Legacypac (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Labeling something as "Former X" is a tricky issue and shouldn't be done when things are ambiguous. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:57, 17 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 procedural closure, as third-degree murder is now an article (thanks 59.149.124.29!). I'll retarget both of the other redirects there, noting that other !votes were "keep all", not keep all but 3rd degree Murder. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Third degree murder → Murder#Degrees of murder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Third-degree murder → Murder#Degrees of murder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 3rd Degree Murder → Murder#Degrees of murder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Though these redirects are mentioned in the target article, the use of the term "3rd" or "third" in regards to it use to define its "degree" is not well described in the target article. I found that the use of "3rd degree" is described/identified well in Murder (United States law)#Degrees, but I am unsure if the use of "3rd degree" in regards to "murder" is exclusive to the United States. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all. I don't see a significant problem with the current target, which briefly describes the concept and provides a link to a deeper discussion of the concept in the U.S. context. The description in the current target could be more substantial, but it exists, so there's no reason not to send the reader to it. I note that the current target also mentions that third-degree murder exists in Peruvian law, so retargeting to the U.S.-specific article would not be a good solution. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:46, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The relevant section of Peru's Criminal Code [4] no longer even defines a crime known as "murder" (asesinato); since 2014 it is known as "homicidio calificado". And "homicidio" is divided only by types (e.g. parricide, infanticide, merciful homicide), not by numbered degrees as in U.S. law. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:09, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete Third degree murder, Keep 3rd and Third-degree - The former isn't recognised as the official one I don't think and searching it here gives us both "Third degree murder" and "Third-degree murder", the latter ones are plausible search terms. –Davey2010^Talk 14:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all as per Animalparty - In terms of linking the non-hyphenation one helps .... and the other 2 for plausible search terms. –Davey2010^Talk 00:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all, per Arms & Hearts' rationale. And a minor difference in hyphenation does absolutely no harm, and can aid in linking. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I made third-degree murder into its own article. As far as I can tell, nominator is correct: "third-degree murder" is US-only legal terminology, and in fact is rare even within the US. Only three states currently have a crime called "third-degree murder", and their definitions clash (e.g. Minnesota defines third-degree murder as felony murder, whereas Pennsylvania put felony murder into second-degree murder and defined third-degree as anything not first or second degree). So this ends up being kind of a verbose WP:CONCEPTDAB rather than a "real article" ...

Anyway I'd suggest retargeting third degree murder to third-degree murder as a reasonable variation, but deleting 3rd Degree Murder per WP:DIFFCAPS. Someone who explicitly types title-case into a Wikilink or the URL bar is trying to find a proper noun, not a generic noun; redirecting title case lemmas to normal case lemmas just promotes mislinking. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:03, 13 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 delete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:13, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The connection between the redirect and the target is not clear, nor is the redirect mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Murk (disambiguation) which explains the term, although that might have to be removed for the MOS:DABMENTION purposes. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:38, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• I think a soft redirect to Wiktionary is the best solution here. It's a plausible enough search term, so there's no benefit to deletion. The current target is no good as it doesn't mention the term. And the disambiguation page is insufficient both because it fails WP:DABMENTION and because there is another meaning of "murk" as a verb listed at Wiktionary that isn't listed at the dab (and shouldn't be). As a somewhat obscure term that is not mentioned in Wikipedia but is defined at Wiktionary, a soft redirect is the best solution. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:54, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. None of the entries on the dab page Murk are relevant. I don't think redirecting to wiktionary is a good idea: soft redirects are only used for terms that readers search for (see the criteria listed in the documentation), and this redirect receives less than one view per week, which in my opinion is below the threshold. – Uanfala (talk) 20:58, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - If people want to find out what it means they can use Google (where they'll find results for UrbanDictionary and WikiDictionary or whatever it's called). –Davey2010^Talk 14:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, rather obscure slang as far as I can tell. Not in article and no non-dictionary RS to write about the term itself. I have also removed the entry at Murk (disambiguation). LaundryPizza03 (talk) 16:39, 12 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 delete. With nobody knowing what to do with the redirect and a general agreement that the current target isn't appropriate, that leaves deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Special circumstances (criminal law) → Murder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Though this is present in Special circumstances, it is not mentioned in its target article. (This redirect currently fails MOS:DABMENTION on the aforementioned disambiguation page.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I believe it's usually a synonym for aggravating circumstances, which is discussed at aggravation (law), though I'm having a hell of a time finding a source that comes right out and says that so it can be mentioned there. Also, "special circumstances" don't just apply to the crime of murder (e.g. the crime of retail theft with special circumstances in Washington state), though that's the context where they get the most attention because of the link to capital punishment. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:06, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I found a good explanation of the differences between special circumstances and aggravating circumstances. Palmer, Louis J. (1998). "Distinguishing Special Circumstances and Statutory Aggravators". The Death Penalty: An American Citizen's Guide to Understanding Federal and State Laws. McFarland. ISBN 9780786404445. ((cite book)): External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help) Still dunno what to do with the redirect, since I guess that means a retarget to aggravation (law) isn't appropriate. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 15:23, 16 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 retarget to Siete. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:26, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• El Siete → Azteca 7  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not in target PRehse (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. Per the subject's website, its tag line is "El Siete". That, and the redirect doesn't fail WP:FORRED as the redirect's target is a television station that broadcasts in Spanish. (But yes, per nom, if this redirect is kept, it should be mentioned in the target article.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment should Siete be a disambiguation? Siete can refer to the Spanish word to seven, Siete (singer), El Siete, Siete album by Presuntos Implicados, Siete (album) by Carlos Varela. There's also a Sietes, LaSiete, and it can house a link to PTM's. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:48, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Siete is now a dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Since another band El Sie7e has surfaced, but neither is really primary topic, I'd recommend the dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, I've lazily added it to the target. El Sie7e isn't an exact match, but a hatnote could be useful. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Siete. --BDD (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the dab: useful target, and the clearest, nonbranding use. Plenty of other topics. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:22, 24 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 retarget to Military technology. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:54, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weapons of war → Assault weapon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The term "weapons of war" is so broad that it could apply to anything from spears, to swords, to aircraft, to ICBMS. It makes no sense at all to redirect this title to an article that is solely about handheld firearms. Instead of deletion, perhaps the redirect could be retargeted to weapon or military technology. Either would be way better than the current target. Peacock (talk) 13:36, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete pointless redirect, no need to salvage it. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget - This is the title of a song on the album Playground Battle (noting here that I just created 'Weapons of War (song)' as well). CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Military technology, which seems like quite a comprehensive, reasonably well-sourced overview of weapons used in warfare. Weapon deals with weapons used in contexts other than war, so it's a less than ideal target. The song by The Feelers seems obscure enough that actual weapons of war would be the primary topic, though a hatnote for Playground Battle would be appropriate. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget or disambiguate. feminist (talk) 13:33, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It looks like Weapon has a hatnote already for military technology. Now there's I diavoli di Spartivento which attracts the redirect for Weapons of War. Should it redirect to that film and add a hatnote? Should a dab be created for both and then Weapons of War (film)? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:39, 14 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 delete. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:48, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Name A Yellow Fruit → Orange (fruit)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A highly implausible redirect, to say the least... I know it's a Family Feud reference, but this is hardly the place for in. In fact, I think I might WP:DAFT this, if indeed it actually gets removed. Thegreatluigi (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment are there some news sources that would support this as with the In the butt, Bob phrase [5]? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even if there are it should be retargted to the Family Feud article not the article for the fruit for the same reason In the butt, Bob is not a redirect to Anal Sex.--64.229.165.48 (talk) 02:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There are some bare mentions in Google News [6][7][8], but it looks far too trivial to be worth a mention at Family Feud (which doesn't list any other famous silly answers either). Also FWIW, In the butt, Bob had far better sources than that, and it was still was removed from The Newlywed Game by editors of that article, apparently due to WP:WEIGHT issues. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:36, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Relocate It's a reference to Family Feud and I get the idea, but without context, the redirect makes no sense. I believe this should redirect to Family Feud. DatGuyonYouTube (talk) 14:30, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't an article or list for game show gaffes / blunders, but if there were, that's where it would go. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:07, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - implausible search term. –Davey2010^Talk 14:21, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - It's funny and all, but this isn't particularly notable even in the specific context of the show's history. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all the above, and definitely list at DAFT. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:15, 19 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 delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Town Convent → CHIJMES  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect apparently exists because this church was once the town convent in Singapore. But Singapore is clearly not the only city that has had a town convent. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:54, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per Nom. Too vague to be worthwhile. Thegreatluigi (talk) 14:25, 12 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 retarget to Water (disambiguation). Killiondude (talk) 05:36, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Watered → Moire (fabric)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Neelix redirect that I have no clue what to do with. Tazerdadog (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• This originally pointed to Watering can, but the target was changed in 2012 by KDS4444. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 04:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete as useless redirect - No objections to anyone creating "Watered silk" as a redirect to the fabric article. –Davey2010^Talk 14:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Water (disambiguation) as per Angus - Probably should've done research first but yeah as we have "Watered" articles I suppose it'd make sense to redirect, I suppose readers could want to know more about it. –Davey2010^Talk 18:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Water (disambiguation) where Wiktionary includes watered. There are multiple PTMs for watered: Watered stock, Watered Lawn, Watered Down, Watered silk (now created), Watered steel. No notable media titles that just go by Watered. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:51, 12 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.