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) 23:17, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Scource of God → Attila  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is just a typo for "Scourge of God", a nickname for Attila the Hun. An unlikely to be meaningfully reduplicated error. Most readers will have it corrected automatically in the search bar, anyway, and as it is not a misspelling of the target name, but simply of a nickname... Also, it could just as easily be a misspelling of "Source of God" and redirect to Existence of God. In short, not useful. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete a bridge too far for a typo, per nom. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely misspelling --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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) 23:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Christ Holy → Jesus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not an actual phrase. Very minimal pageviews (8 in the past 90 days). — the Man in Question (in question) 23:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as vague. Closest target is a partial one: Christ Holy Church International --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:02, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 Anthropometry. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:48, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Somatometry → Category:Human size  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Somatometric → Category:Human size  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is almost certainly a notable topic and IMO should be a redlink until an article can be written (perhaps at Body measurements). Another idea would be to redirect to Bust/waist/hip measurements, the current target of the Body measurements, although this is a subtopic of of the subject _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all to Body measurements if not too much of a hassle. Current redirects are unacceptable as cross-namespace from the mainspace. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:05, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment another option is Anthropometry, of which this is a subtopic or branch topic. It depends on whether Body measurements is meant to be as comprehensive. Bust-waist-hip is a very superficial subset of measurements. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:22, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Anthropometry, the measurement of the human individual. Add an explanatory hatnote along the lines of ((redirect|Body measurements|"vital statistics"|Bust/waist/hip measurements)). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to Anthropometry. It should really be used or explained somewhere, though. --BDD (talk) 20:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. --BDD (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Revenge of the Mummy (Universal Studios Dubailand) → Universal Studios Dubailand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• King Kong (Universal Studios Dubailand) → Universal Studios Dubailand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The existence of these redirects infers that these things exist or existed: as the target article makes clear, they never did. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The existence of these redirects simply infer that there is content about this concept at the target. Someone searching for information on these rides will learn by following the redirect that these rides, like the park itself, was cancelled. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 Green Bag. I see a rough consensus that there is not a primary topic between the magazines/journals. The disambiguation page Green Bag already has both entries, so I will retarget there as ((R from incomplete disambiguation)), which satisfies those !voting "disambiguate" keeping WP:INCOMPDAB in mind. That also means that the magazine/journal founded in 1997 needs a disambiguated name, and I am choosing The Green Bag (1997) to match The Green Bag (1889–1914). I don't feel strongly about the name at all so feel free to boldly change it or hash it out at WP:RM if desired. That being said, I decided against using the subtitle because none of the sources use it (including the Green Bag website). -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The Green Bag (magazine) → The Green Bag (1889–1914)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The Green Bag is the name of two different magazines, the historical legal humor journal at The Green Bag (1889–1914), and the current journal located at The Green Bag. My retargeting of this redirect to the disambiguation page Green Bag, per WP:INCOMPDAB, was reverted without explanation by User:Jay D. Easy, so I bring this here to settle the question. bd2412 T 20:59, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Is a journal considered a magazine? If it is then pointing to Green Bag is best, or The Green Bag as a redirect from unnecessary disambiguation, assuming it's the primary topic. —Xezbeth (talk) 10:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • In terms of the publication format, I don't know what distinction can be drawn between a journal and a magazine. In this case, both are regular publications containing collections of relatively short pieces by varying authors. bd2412 T 11:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to The Green Bag. If we think there's no primary topic between the two publications, rename the current one and retarget to the disambiguation page. I would support either of these outcomes. --BDD (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambig I'm unable to identify a primary topic between the two publications mentioned above. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate at Green Bag and tag as ((R from incomplete disambiguation)), though I'm happy for disambiguation at another title. I don't think there is a clear boundary between a "journal" and a "magazine", so it will be appropriate to disambiguate this title. Deryck C. 09:44, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retargeting per nom seems fine to me, but my preference is probably: Retarget to The Green Bag (1889–1914) and add a hatnote on The Green Bag (1889–1914) "For the journal, see the The Green Bag." But I do think the distinction between journal and magazine is slight in terms of what readers might search for. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate. As far as I can tell, both publications can easily be described as "magazines", and I don't see any reason to treat one of them as a primary topic over the other. I think it's best to move The Green Bag to The Green Bag: An Entertaining Journal of Law, and then disambiguate that title as well (either on its own page, or by redirecting to the dab Green Bag). – Uanfala (talk) 11:58, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn by nom. (non-admin closure) _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Random, unuseful capitalization. I withdraw this nomination per ((R from CamelCase)). — the Man in Question (in question) 22:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. No camelcase stylization of this term. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep the Man in Question, you didn't nominate this right. Either way, deference should be made to ((R from CamelCase)) redirects. They are a historic part of this project, and nothing is gained by haphazardly deleting the few that remain. ^{MiQ: How did you find this redirect? It's freaking tucked away. The only person who's edited it recently was me a month ago.} –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:07, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm sorry I didn't tag it! A late night oversight. Actually, you're right this is an example of camelcase, I just wasn't familiar with this style of camelcase (as opposed to ManifolD) when I nominated it. I don't remember how I found it. — the Man in Question (in question) 21:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I have moved the CamelCase tag to the top, for clarity, and removed the unprintworthy, since one of the other tags applies the category. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC).[reply]
  

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 delete as undiscussed. From a cursory search, it appears to be a semi-obscure fanboy meme. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The Flanneled One → George Lucas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Commentary, not redirect material. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:30, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 Speedy delete. (non-admin closure) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This section has been blanked as a courtesy.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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) 03:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The Storm (Stranger Things) → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Secret Cabin → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Pumpkin Patch → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Palace (Stranger Things) → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Lost Brother (Stranger Things) → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Brain (Stranger Things) → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Boy Who Came Back to Life → Stranger Things  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unless I missed something, these aren't names of Stranger Things episodes (and they aren't mentioned on the page). Gonnym (talk) 13:18, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• This might shed some light on it. Looks like they were episode titles that were either unconfirmed and/or later changed. PC78 (talk) 17:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unlikely to be significant now that the actual episode names are out (and the episodes themselves). If they do turn out to gain some kind of significance in time to come, they can always be recreated. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• HP! → HP1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

HP! is not at all the same as HP1. If someone mistypes HP! for HP1 and hits enter, they will realize their mistake and fix it, the same way as if I accidentally typed WW@ for WW2, I would not expect there to be a redirect. — the Man in Question (in question) 10:32, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per previous discussion and tag as a ((r from typo)) and ((r from ambiguous term)). (Also, for the record, WW@ has redirected to World War II since 2012.) - Eureka Lott 13:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Ha. Didn't know about WW@. Thanks for pointing that out. Yes, I was there at the 2010 discussion when it was redirected to HP1. Not a fan of that decision. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:31, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:PANDORA. You could conceivably have such redirects for any page title which has numbers in it. Better to highlight the mistake IMO rather than masking it with a redirect. PC78 (talk) 10:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per previous discussion. Whether other redirects from similar titles are useful or not is not relevant to this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 20:16, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Deryck C. 11:06, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• αlpha-Aminonaphthalene (Latin a, b) → 1-Naphthylamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• αlpha-Pyrrolidinopentiothiophenone (Latin a, b) → Alpha-Pyrrolidinopentiothiophenone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• αlpha-glucanase (Latin a, b) → Glucanase  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• αlpha-glucanases (Latin a, b) → Glucanase  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• αlpha-methyl-phenethylamine (Latin a, b) → Amphetamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• αlpha-methyl-phenyl-ethyl-amine (Latin a, b) → Amphetamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Aminobutyric acid (Latin a, b) → Beta-Aminobutyric acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Dihydroequilin (Latin a, b) → 17β-Dihydroequilin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Melanocortin (Latin a, b) → Beta-Melanocyte-stimulating hormone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Melanotropin (Latin a, b) → Beta-Melanocyte-stimulating hormone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Phenethylamine (Latin a, b) → Phenethylamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-Phenylethylamine (Latin a, b) → Phenethylamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-dihydroequilin (Latin a, b) → 17β-Dihydroequilin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-melanocortin (Latin a, b) → Beta-Melanocyte-stimulating hormone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-melanotropin (Latin a, b) → Beta-Melanocyte-stimulating hormone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-phenethylamine (Latin a, b) → Phenethylamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• βeta-phenylethylamine (Latin a, b) → Phenethylamine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

All of the Alphas begin with Greek α, not English A; all of the Betas begin with Greek β, not English B. No use to such mixing. See WP:RfD/Log/2010 January 6#Βeta, WP:RfD/Log/2010 January 6#Аugust 2, and WP:RfD/Log/2019 July 2#Маrchа dоs Реsсаdоrеs. — the Man in Question (in question) 08:41, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Delete. α and β in title not visible as explained by nom. This is exactly the whole point of a redirect: I cannot type an "α" on my en keyboard, so I geniunely expect that "alpha" should do. (for α-Naphthylamine). -DePiep (talk) 00:06, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I think you may misunderstand. Each of these does not begin with the word "Alpha" or "Beta", but with a nonexistent word "αlpha" spelled with the letter α, and a nonexistent word "βeta" spelled with the letter β. I quite agree with you, and that's not what's going on here. In fact, the point you are making is kind of the same one I am making. This is the same situation as Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 2#Маrchа dоs Реsсаdоrеs. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I now see for midlist βeta-Aminobutyric acid, but top Αlpha-Aminonaphthalene does not show this? (αlpha-Aminonaphthalene?). Anyway, of course a delete all for those actual situations you describe. -DePiep (talk) 01:16, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  @DePiep: All instances above are as I described. You can check this by copying the first letter of any entry and entering it into the search bar. The search result will be the page for the corresponding Greek letter. — the Man in Question (in question) 02:33, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  OK, so I changed into Delete all.

  Finally got it!: α and β are lowercase in Greek alphabet, and since wiki turns titles in uppercase-first αfoo and βbar change to (((ucfirst:...))) Αfoo and Βbar. As it happens, uppercase α and β in greek alphabet look the same as Latin A and B (see alpha). As wikilinks work, we can write lowercase and still get the blue link: αlpha-Aminonaphthalene. In that Redirect page itself, I added ((lowercasetitle)) which shows the alpha character nicely & legally.

  The first "A" in Αlpha-Aminonaphthalene is actually the Greek "A". U+0391 Α GREEK CAPITAL LETTER ALPHA is a different Unicode character than U+0041 A LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A, so it might sort differently e.g. in categories (depends on wiki software). This point in your nomination, re "English A", is slightly incorrect (not fatal though ;-) ). -DePiep (talk) 08:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  In this edit, I have changed the relevant titles into straight lc alpha and beta, so that the issue shows. @The Man in Question:. -DePiep (talk) 08:50, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. αlpha and βeta are non-existent words. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:05, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• delete the one I made was created in error, I really meant to make Alpha-Aminonaphthalene (which I have now done). I must have assumed what I saw was A-AminonaphthaleneIt would be good if the mediawiki software did not autocapitalise the Greek letters on English Wikipedia. So the others (created in error), should be replaced with alpha- and beta- redirects, using Latin letters. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:47, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I strongly advise moving all of these pages to the appropriate page title (if it doesn't already exist) with redirect suppression enabled; for those that do already exist, delete. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 13:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added links to the "alpha-", "beta-" spelled pagenames (using Latin a, b, lowercase here); wikilink label is (Latin a, b). These are the links User:Seppi333 is referring to. Note that the full-Latin-pagename may be the article name (not a redirect; see #2). -DePiep (talk) 09:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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) 03:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• aɪˈtælɪk → Italic type  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• andəʂ oːslʉnd → Anders Åslund  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• la.i.siˈte → Laïcité  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• mʲɪxɐˈil mʲɪˈxajləvʲɪtɕ kɐˈsʲjanəf → Mikhail Kasyanov  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• monteβi'ðeo → Montevideo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

• plaɪd ˈkəmri → History of Plaid Cymru  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

• viktɔʁ maʁi yˈɡo → Victor Hugo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• vwɔˈdʑimʲɛʃ tɕimɔˈʃɛvʲitʃ → Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Pronunciations do not valid redirects make. Compare: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 December 31#'nunu 'aɫvɐɾɨʃ pɨ'ɾɐjɾɐ, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 January 6#ɑ̃sjɛ̃ ʁeʒim. — the Man in Question (in question) 08:07, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• dəˈliːt pər nɔːm ænd ˈpriːˌβiːəs ɑːr ɛɸ diːz. ɪmˈplɔːzɪˌbəl sɜːrt͡ʃ ˈmɛθəds. (aɪ ˈriːli duː proʊˈnaʊns ɛɸ ænd βiː laɪk ðæt; aɪ doʊnt noʊ waɪ.) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:24, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  /ˈhɑ/! /aɪ wəz ˈwʌndərɪŋ/... — the Man in Question (in question) 18:11, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 no consensus. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Necromancing the Stone (Charmed Episode) → Charmed (season 5)#ep109  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a case of miscapitalisation. In fact, there are no mainspace articles linking to this redirect, hence no concern regarding history. If ever the episode gets its own article, it will be titled "Necromancing the Stone (Charmed)". Kailash29792 (talk) 06:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. WP:RDAB. — the Man in Question (in question) 21:57, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as harmless and unambiguous, and tag as ((r from incorrect disambiguation)) if desired. - Eureka Lott 18:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: All these "harmless and unambiguous" labels may instead be applied to Necromancing the Stone (Charmed episode). Kailash29792 (talk) 08:40, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree with your underlying point. But in Eureka's defense (not that she needs defending), she only said it once. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if I didn't make my position clear. The only issue with the nominated redirect is a capitalization error, which doesn't come close to making it an improbable typo. It meets none of the criteria in WP:RFD#DELETE, and as an old redirect, deleting it could be WP:RFD#HARMFUL. - Eureka Lott 02:06, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If I sounded too offensive, I apologise. But the issue is, the incorrect capitalised redirect appears in the search bar instead of the correct version which is Necromancing the Stone (Charmed episode). Also, deleting unhelpful redirects helps clear up this category. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:00, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These issues can be resolved through tagging. If you don't want redundant redirects in the episodes category, they're easy to remove. Tagging redirects as unprintworthy should remove them from the searchbox autocomplete, but it appears that's not happening. I think that's a bug. Thryduulf may know more about that, but it looks like he's away right now. - Eureka Lott 21:37, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't got time right now to comment on this specific redirect, but unprintworthy redirects have appeared and disappeared from the search results suggestion box a couple of times over the years. Personally I think it would be good if there was a method to exclude pages from autocomplete suggestions, either by means of the unprintworthy tag or by some other method (probably some magic word that could be included in templates as desired). If there is nothing on phabricator currently, then start a discussion somewhere (WT:REDIRECT possibly, or maybe one of the village pumps if its wider than redirects) and then request it at phabricator (don't expect anything speedy there though). There has never been a consensus though that the undesirability of a redirect appearing in autocomplete suggestions is a valid reason for deleting a redirect, so if this is the only argument against the redirect (I've not read the whole discussion) then it should probably not be deleted. Remember the internal search engine is only one of many ways of search or browsing Wikipedia and most methods do not have autocomplete suggestions, and it is not possible to know which methods people use for any given page. Thryduulf (talk) 23:06, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per EurekaLott. The appropriate Rcats are already there to mark it as incorrect disambiguation and an avoided double redirect. --BDD (talk) 20:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Deryck C. 11:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• What is now the United States → History of the United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unhelpful search term and potential Pandora's Box. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:17, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It is a Pandoras Box. Not needed. AmericanAir88^(talk) 14:34, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. I think the redirect's grammar is also a bit awkward --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Deryck C. 11:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• How to climb → John Long (climber)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

John Long wrote a book called How to Rock Climb! This title, How to Climb, is not the name of the book, and is too generic. If it were to be kept, it would need to be retargeted to Climbing; but scroll down and you'll see my opinion on that kind of redirect. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:14, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Sounds good to me. Stevage 12:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nominator. The creator of the redirect (Stevage) has given his approval. — the Man in Question (in question) 17:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTHOWTO and similar Redirects. -DePiep (talk) 19:59, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This redirect may cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as confusing --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:46, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Very confusing. AmericanAir88^(talk) 13:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 04:56, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• What not to wera → What Not to Wear  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Clearly just a typo. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:08, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi! Creator of this redirect here. Yes, a typo, obvs.  :) But the creation of a redirect at this title was intentional. A basic reflex I have when I type something incorrectly into the search bar and it leads me to a redlink + search page is to create a redirect from whatever the typo was. My reasoning is that typos aren't randomized - they arise either from a person's misunderstanding (and misperception of spelling is generally a small Levenshtein distance from the correct, so some misspellings will be 'common'), or from a mechanical error - a person strikes one or more wrong keys, or the right keys in the wrong order, and again the possible misspellings are not infinite and actually small in number.
  In short: I don't think anyone should go out of their way to create redirects from typos, but if *you* made the typo, it's reasonable to assume someone else might, so a redirect there will help future person, and causes no harm to the project. Ford MF (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I see your reasoning, but that would open up a Pandora's Box where literally anything can be a redirect. If the absence of such typos as redirects created a real barrier to readers finding articles, then I would support their inclusion and retention. But a typo (rather than a misspelling) is easy to fix. I'll admit some typos are so common as to be useful, but I don't think this one qualifies. — the Man in Question (in question) 22:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I mean ... why don't you think it qualifies? Pandora is an essay (or set of opinions, really), not policy, so I don't think it should be referred to as if it were definitive, or a consensus set of criteria for inclusion. And even the essay describes unneeded redirects as _implausible typos_. In this particular case, such a redirect would have actually saved a Wikipedian (me!) some few seconds of hassle, so I would not describe this as implausible. Ford MF (talk) 04:09, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, flipped ordering for adjacent letters is a fairly common variety of typo. Additionally, Pandora's box has already been opened as far as redirects like this are concerned. I honestly don't think it's worth taking the time to bring to RfD. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not worth AfDing plausible typos (unless extreme case where someone is mass producing WP:BEANS).—Bagumba (talk) 08:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, fair typo for somebody to make.Utopes (talk) 04:22, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 some without prejudice against individual discussions for the others. The ones deleted:

• Are elephants afraid of mice?
• Can dogs see ghosts?
• How are numbers allotted to Indian trains?
• How are numbers allotted to wagons
• How is glass made
• How is paper made
• How many countries are there in the world
• How many spaces after a period
• How old is the earth
• How old is the earth?
• How to compose music
• How to control global warming
• Is global warming real?
• Is original sin in Scripture?
• Is the electron a small black hole
• Is the world going to end
• Is there life on Mars?
• Is there life on other planets
• Is there life on other planets?
• Is zero even
• What caused the Cold War
• What chav stands for
• What color is Mars
• What color is Mars?
• What colour is Mars
• What colour is Mars?
• What colours can be made from natural dyes
• What heaven looks like
• What if extraterrestrials come to Earth
• What is a museum
• What is a national award
• What is a rain chain?
• What is a trandoshan
• What is chocolate?
• What is the origin of life?
• What kind of method is being used in VR
• What legends are in NBA Elite 11 for ipod
• What would happen if a king was murdered?
• When is Christmas
• When is Christmas?
• When is Easter
• When was the Berlin Wall built
• Who are the oldest living and deceased actors and actresses of all time?
• Who was to Blame for WWI
• Who was to Blame for the First World War
• Who was to blame for WWI

-- JHunterJ (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Are elephants afraid of mice? → Fear of mice  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Can dogs see ghosts? → Pet psychic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Can you hear the shape of a drum? → Hearing the shape of a drum  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How can a tram route cross a trolley bus route without short circuits → Overhead line  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How many countries are there in the world → List of sovereign states  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How many spaces after a period → Sentence spacing  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How old is the earth → Age of the Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How old is the earth? → Age of the Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How to compose music → Musical composition  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How are numbers allotted to Indian trains? → Train numbering in India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How are numbers allotted to wagons → Wagon numbering system in India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How is glass made → Glass production  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How is paper made → Papermaking  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• How to control global warming → Climate change mitigation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is global warming real? → Global warming controversy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is original sin in Scripture? → Original sin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is the electron a small black hole → Black hole electron  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is there life on Mars? → Life on Mars (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is there life on other planets → Extraterrestrial life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is there life on other planets? → Extraterrestrial life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is the world going to end → Eschatology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Is zero even → Parity of zero  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What caused the Cold War → Cold War (1947–1953)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What chav stands for → Chav  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What color is Mars → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What color is Mars? → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What colour is Mars → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What colour is Mars? → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What colours can be made from natural dyes → Biological pigment  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What heaven looks like → Heaven  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What if extraterrestrials come to Earth → Potential cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is a museum → Museum  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is a national award → National Film Awards  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is a rain chain? → Rain chain  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is a trandoshan → List of Star Wars species (P–T)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is chocolate? → Outline of chocolate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is law? → Philosophy of law  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the nature of life? → Meaning of life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the nature of reality? → Meaning of life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the origin of life? → Abiogenesis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the reason to live? → Meaning of life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the significance of life? → Meaning of life#Questions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What is the value of life? → Meaning of life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What kind of method is being used in VR → Virtual reality  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What legends are in NBA Elite 11 for ipod → NBA Elite 11  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• What would happen if a king was murdered? → Regicide  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• When is Christmas → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• When is Christmas? → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• When is Easter → List of dates for Easter  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• When was the Berlin Wall built → Berlin Wall  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Who are the oldest living and deceased actors and actresses of all time? → List of living actors from the Golden Age of Hollywood  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Who is an Arab → Arab identity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Who was to Blame for the First World War → Causes of World War I  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Who was to blame for WWI → Causes of World War I  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Who was to Blame for WWI → Causes of World War I  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why does the Universe exist? → Problem of why there is anything at all  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why is Mars red → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why is Mars red? → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why is the Sky Blue → Diffuse sky radiation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why is the Sky Blue? → Diffuse sky radiation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why Mars is red → Mars surface color  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Why the sky is blue → Diffuse sky radiation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wikipedia is not a search engine. Wikipedia is not Yahoo Answers. Some question phrases are probably valid redirects, because the questions themselves are notable and have a life of their own, such as "Why is the sky blue?" or "What is the meaning of life?" I have not included any of those here (though I have included some gratuitous variants). Just because something is a common question, that does not mean it should be a Wikipedia redirect. For example, there should not be a redirect "How many ounces are in a pound?" (and there is not), even though that is the tenth most commonly asked question on Google; this is the job of search engines, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not need to offer question-style titles to the question-asking crowd any more than it needs to start offering peanuts and soda to the snack-seeking crowd; question-askers should go to Google, and snack-seekers should go to the convenience store. Compare:

1. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 January 2#What is wikipedia
2. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 7 (see §24–75)
3. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 1#What is islam

— the Man in Question (in question) 03:53, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all You beat me to it. None of these should be in Wikipedia, because of Pandora's box: What is the population of New York City, How high is Mount Everest, every other possible question will surely follow, it is only a question of when. I am confident in !voting delete even though there have been prevous discussions of some of these, such as Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 28#When is Christmas, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 28#When was the Berlin Wall built. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  And there have also been very successful deletion discussions on this topic. — the Man in Question (in question) 05:24, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Exactly. And thanks for adding that link. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. Nothing to add to nom. -DePiep (talk) 14:19, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all Wikipedia is not google. AmericanAir88^(talk) 14:33, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep a few of these redirects, even if most of them are redundant. Why does the Universe exist? probably shouldn't be deleted, since this is one of the central problems of metaphysics. Jarble (talk) 01:48, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Can you please specify which redirects you feel this way about, so we can discuss each one? As for the one you mentioned, I did not list Why is there anything at all and Why is there something rather than nothing? (both of which are mentioned in the target article) for this very reason, but I didn't think "Why does the Universe exist?" was so iconic a phrasing that it passed the not-Yahoo-Answers test. A Google Books search shows that this phrase is found in very few books, and in inconsistent contexts. (A simple Google Books search turns up many matches, because Google Books will approximate a search even if it is put in quotation marks; you have to actually check the individual entries to see if the phrase occurs.) But of course we can discuss the merits of keeping this and any other redirects. — the Man in Question (in question) 02:46, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete trivial items “What_is_X ↳ [[X]]” but keep the rest. What happened to en.Wikipedia? In 2012 local people tended to keep even mojibake; when ru.Wikipedia-style deletionists gained ground here? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:50, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Nothing has changed. See old RfDs linked in nom. — the Man in Question (in question) 07:30, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all It's folly to think we can attain natural language processing by manually creating these redirects. In a related front, these same editors can work on misspelling and related search term redirects, which is subpar at best.—Bagumba (talk) 13:54, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Note to closer: Do not let my "delete all" !vote preclude keeping individual entries. Consider me neutral on those specific ones that may have traction to keep.—Bagumba (talk) 10:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Subthread on What is law? and Can you hear the shape of a drum?:
  • Keep What is law? because the question is notable. There is a very large body of literature devoted to the definition of law and therefore to that question. It is possibly the most important area of the field of study that is called jurisprudence and has been a massive controversy in that field of study since the nineteenth century. James500 (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I think that's fair. (But let's hear consensus.) — the Man in Question (in question) 04:18, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I disagree, do not keep. The question is answered in Law, as this is an encyclopedia. About every article is approached with question "What is X?". (Strange btw that the redirect is actually to Philosophy of law.) Only when the phrase itself is well established, it could be kept. I can think of The meaning of life, the universe and everything. -DePiep (talk) 10:27, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Can you hear the shape of a drum?, likely variation of Can one hear the shape of a drum?, the famous title of the relevant article. No opinion on the others.—Kusma (t·c) 20:15, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    "Can one hear the shape of a drum?" is not the title of the article. The article is titled Hearing the shape of a drum. I have added this redirect, and I will assume your objection covers both redirects. [I have removed "Can one..." per Michael Hardy.] — the Man in Question (in question) 22:45, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    The title of the Wikipedia article is Hearing the shape of a drum. The title of the famous article (paper) is Can one hear the shape of a drum?, and I am one of the people who mis-remembered it as "Can you hear the shape of a drum". —Kusma (t·c) 06:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Thanks for clarifying. — the Man in Question (in question) 18:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • OBVIOUSLY keep Can one hear the shape of a drum?. It's likely to be entered into the search box because it the title of a very famous paper. @UnitedStatesian: It is nonsense to compare this to "every other possible question" for the same reason it is nonsense to compare "Albert Einstein" to "every other person's name". Michael Hardy (talk) 23:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    I was not aware that "Can One Hear the Shape of a Drum?" was the name of a paper. Thank you for bringing that to our attention. I object to your calling UnitedStatesian's comment "nonsense"; obviously Albert Einstein is enormously better known than this paper, and neither he nor I am to blame for not being familiar with it. (I respectfully request for everyone's sake that next time you come to the rescue of a redirect you please do it graciously instead of accusatorily or belittlingly, and trust that a good case will win the day.) I will withdraw Can one hear the shape of a drum? as the name of an established paper. I am leaving "Can you..." in to be open for discussion. — the Man in Question (in question) 23:45, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Keep Can you hear the shape of a drum? because it differs in only one word from the title of the famous paper titled "Can One Hear the Shape of a Drum?" and is likely to be entered into a search box by people whose memory of the famous paper's title has somewhat faded. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Can you hear the shape of a drum? and What is law?; Delete the rest. Per above, and the phrase "What is Law?" appears (now prominently) in the lead of Philosophy of law. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 08:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC) Edited: see comment below 04:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I see some trains about to wreck. Steel1943 (talk) 19:23, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  So far it seems to be going fine. Compare the very similar Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 January 2#What is wikipedia. We're smart enough for this. — the Man in Question (in question) 19:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  ...Editors saying keeps some, then delete others and/or no opinion about the others ... maybe my crystal ball is broken... Steel1943 (talk) 19:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm just saying that, as in the old discussion I linked, more than one decision can be reached in the end. For example, the result could be "Delete, with the exception of What is law? and Can you hear the shape of a drum?". — the Man in Question (in question) 19:53, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  ...I'm just saying this out of precedence. A lot of these types were nominated back in August 2015, such as on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 4. Steel1943 (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment. One or more of these redirect has been nominated for RFD in the past. I'll compile the list if I have time, but if anyone beats me to it or no one does it, won't bother me any. Steel1943 (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, one or more of these redirects aren't tagged with ((RfD)) as required. I'll try to fix those as I do the search. Steel1943 (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  ...Geez, I'm done looking at the histories for now. I'll just start casting some vote(s) since not all of these are WP:NOTHOWTO. Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  ...And I only have two for now: Keep Can you hear the shape of a drum? per Kusma since it is the name of a creative work, and possibly keep How can a tram route cross a trolley bus route without short circuits since it is a ((R from merge)) and even survived a RfD discussion in 2017. (I'm starting to think more WP:BEFORE should have been done prior to this nomination being posted.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  "...tram..." had also been deleted in 2010. I have added more old RfDs. — the Man in Question (in question) 21:38, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Can you hear the shape of a drum? and Why is the sky blue? - I feel these 2 are certainly the most helpful but the rest not so much. –Davey2010^Talk 21:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Struck the sky one as that's not even listed here. –Davey2010^Talk 21:30, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all per WP:TRAINWRECK. I don't have time to look at all of these in detail, but some of these (e.g. ones about the sky being blue, about the meaing of life, Is global warming real, etc.) are very valid search terms, others have survived previous discussions, or are titles of creative works. Finally the rationales citied in the nomination are about article content not redirects. No prejudice to focused, small nominations with rationales relevant to the specifically nominated redirects, but a group nomination this large and disperate is not appropraite. Thryduulf (talk) 23:56, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  As stated explicitly in the nomination, I did not nominate Why is the sky blue? or What is the meaning of life? because they were worthwhile: They are not on the list. I would ask that you do take the care to consider the nominees so as not to create an unnecessary trainwreck. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:12, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  You have included some redirects about the sky being blue, etc. I ask that you do take the care to consider making focused nominations with rationales that are specifically relevant to individual redirects. The burden is always on the person wishing to change the status quo. Explicitly all redirects that have been discussed before should be kept unless nominated with a rationale that explicitly addresses the issues raised in the previous discussion(s). Thryduulf (talk) 10:43, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all as nominator, though I have no strong objection to keeping Can you hear the shape of a drum? and What is law?. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Summary of votes so far (in order to prevent this from being mistaken as a trainwreck): — the Man in Question (in question) 00:32, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  1. DELETE ALL / DELETE ALL except #3 and #4 below : 6
  2. KEEP ALL : 1
  3. KEEP Can you hear the shape of a drum? : 4
  4. KEEP What is law? : 2
  5. OTHER : 2

  • That would be useful if this was a vote, but it isn't. Thryduulf (talk) 10:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep very few, and Delete the rest. Yes, most of these should be deleted, but there are some that I feel are fine which I will cover.

  1. Why is the sky blue with it's capitalization/punctuation variants
  2. Why is Mars red with it's capitalization/punctuation variants

     These I feel are fine, due to these questions in particular being relevant, possible search terms in their own right. The latter may be up for debate, but it's not "what is the color of Mars", but "why is Mars red". Similarly to asking why the sky is blue, it is very common to inquire about why Mars is red.

     Yeah, I feel like "Why is Mars red" is just like "How many ounces are in a pound?"—a common search for Google, sure, but not a valid redirect for Wikipedia. And as for the variations of "Why is the sky blue?" I also intentionally did not include Why is the sky blue (i.e., without a question mark) in the list, but the rest seem entirely superfluous since the article's title is not "Why is the sky blue?". The lack of such alternate capitalizations will not hinder anyone from finding the correct page either through the search bar or through a Google search. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:07, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  3. What is law?
  4. Can you hear the shape of a drum?

     Topical questions in their own right.

  5. What is the nature of life? and any questions asking for the meaning of existence.

     Explained prior. Even if the phrase What is the meaning of life was excluded from the RfD, there are variants still present that could be spared for the same reason, even if it isn't as common.

     But these other phrases are not notable question phrases in their own right, and the article's title is not "What is the meaning of life?" so they are not simply variations on the title. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:07, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

     With all of this being said, everything else should go. I might look over the list and see if there's anything else that seems important to keep, but this seems like a good list to keep out. Utopes (talk) 04:19, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

     Thank you for being specific. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:07, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Why does the Universe exist? as well as all pointing to Meaning of life. Don’t know about the rest so probably keep until individually considered. Hyperbolick (talk) 04:20, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • “Why does the Universe exist?,” worded just so is by the way one of the fundamental questions of philosophy. Hyperbolick (talk) 04:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Screeeeeeechhh.... *crash.* This thread has become a trainwreck officially. I've stricken the delete portion of my !vote. I don't feel comfortable with the direction this has taken (Pictured). –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I don't at all see why this is a trainwreck. Worst comes to worst, all of the controversial entries can be made into separate noms to be discussed, and the rest can be deleted. A trainwreck means an utter failure due to the number of entries, but there are very distinct patterns to the objections above. — the Man in Question (in question) 18:26, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all but xyz - closing suggestion close with "delete all except XYZ (the few that have been discussed/defended), and relist those few as individuals. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 04:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  If that is to be the case, then I'd like to have a separate discussion on [[#Who is an Arab|]] (ie. Keep Who is an Arab) just because I think it would be a better navigational aide than many of the others. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd like all of them to have focused, separate discussions with nominations that relate to the specific redirect and (for those that have been discussed previously) an explanation of what has changed since that discussion and why that means it should be deleted now when it wasn't previously. Thryduulf (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm happy to relist separately any redirect that needs further discussion. But separating every one of those that hasn't been subjected to specific discussion yet into a separate nom is not likely to prove a better means of generating insightful discussion about them. (Of course some new discussion would arise, just as a normal relisting will do.) Experience I expect tells most people in RfD that lumped noms like this actually tend to provoke more thoughtful discussion than long lists of individual nominations, because they attract attention; such at least has been my observation. — the Man in Question (in question) 00:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Here are the redirects that have been singled out for further discussion/keeping: — the Man in Question (in question) 22:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Can you hear the shape of a drum? (I will not relist this one per the discussion)
  2. How can a tram route cross a trolley bus route without short circuits
  3. What is law? (I will not relist this one per the discussion)
  4. What is the nature of life?
  5. What is the nature of reality?
  6. What is the reason to live?
  7. What is the significance of life?
  8. What is the value of life?
  9. Who is an Arab
  10. Why does the Universe exist?
  11. Why is Mars red
  12. Why is Mars red?
  13. Why is the Sky Blue
  14. Why is the Sky Blue?
  • I started going through to note which of the redirects listed are worthy of being disucsssed on their own merits individually. When I got about a third of the way through and realised that I'd listed every single one I realised that the only sensible way forwards is to just fully endorse this nomination as a complete train wreck and encourage its closing as "keep all without prejudice". Thryduulf (talk) 09:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.