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) 20:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dírhael → List of Middle-earth characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article. No WP:ATT issues with deletion. It is mentioned in three articles: A mention in a video game plot summary, a mention at an actor's page that he voiced said video game character, and a mention in the plot summary of a fan film. Not convinced there's any one best targeting point out of any of these. Hog Farm (talk) 23:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom's points. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:f518:ce14:d556:4e50 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Vidyasagar(Indian music director) → Vidyasagar (composer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Cop(police) → Police  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bad spacing, no incoming links or substantive page history. Cheers, gnu57 21:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both - There seems to be no real reason to keep these. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:41, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both. Housekeeping. Narky Blert (talk) 05:31, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both exactly per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:47, 15 April 2020 (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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Charlotte Clair → Charles Leclerc (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Charlotte Claire → Charles Leclerc (general, born 1772)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of anyone with this name at any of the possible targets, unable to clearly tell where this was meant to redirect to either. Iffy★Chat -- 19:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to Charlotte Flair (1^st choice), since the F and C keys are adjacent to each other, and someone's finger might slip off the F key onto the C key, and I can also see someone forgetting the E. Weak delete (2^nd choice) if that doesn't work-I did find an actress by the (stage) name Charlotte Claire on IMDb who apparently appeared in Jaihind 2 but isn't mentioned on its article. To complicate things further, Charlotte Claire redirects to the page about the French Revolution general Charles Leclerc, which I'm adding to the discussion. Regards, SONIC678 21:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll level with ya—I've had a few friends unfamiliar with Formula One ask me "Who is this 'Charlotte Clair[e]' they keep raving about?" Of course, they mean Charles Leclerc, which, when pronounced properly with the silent S and C, sounds almost identical to Charlotte Clair[e]. Guess I was helping them out and anyone else who might get them confused, heh. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Nice story, but not mentioned in article, not a misspelling, and potentially ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:49, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. We don't have redirects from Wan Fanjoe, Nicky Louder, Airton Senner or Lance Troll. Most F1 fans get the spelling from the captions on their TV screens. Narky Blert (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2020 (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 Wikipedia#Coverage of topics and systemic bias. --BDD (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia bias → Reliability of Wikipedia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Wikipedia Bias → Wikipedia#Systemic bias  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Bias on Wikipedia → Criticism of Wikipedia#Systemic bias in coverage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Bias in Wikipedia → Criticism of Wikipedia#Systemic bias in coverage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bundle of many articles that appear like they should have the same target, but do not. Surprisingly, I am of the opinion that these should all target Wikipedia#Coverage of topics and systemic bias (which none of the previous redirects point to), but all of the current targets could very well be potential answers. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:59, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all to target suggested by nom. I agree that that's probably the best target. Hog Farm (talk) 19:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget all per nom. --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 05:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget all per nom. Good solution. Narky Blert (talk) 05:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget all per nom. The "base" article, and a good Level 2 section. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget all - I agree as well. That article provides proper context. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:36, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• IUFRO english: Wikipedia → International Union of Forest Research Organizations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kierkegaard, Wikipedia reviews of works → Søren Kierkegaard bibliography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Jean-Paul PENIN-wikipedia → Jean-Paul Penin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Mădălina Diana Ghenea - Wikipedia → Mădălina Diana Ghenea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Index of flowers with entries in the Wikipedia → List of garden plants  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• List of birds on Wikipedia → List of birds  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Institute of Predictive and Personalized Medicine of Cancer wikipedia → Institute of Predictive and Personalized Medicine of Cancer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Crete wikipedia page → Regional Leishmaniasis Control Center  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Count to 10 in many languages wikipedia → List of numbers in various languages  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Deopahar - Wikipedia → Deopahar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bhagyada balegara (song lyrics) wikipedia → Bhagyada balegara  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Homestar wikipedia → Homestar Runner  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Sardarwadi Wikipedia → Sardarwadi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't know how someone would search "Wikipedia" in the title of a Wikipedia article in this context (although there are some redirects that help people reach their destinations by including "Wikipedia," I don't know how helpful these would be). As cited in the "Deopahar" one's move, it was done for "more accurate search results," perhaps why some of them were moved. Regards, SONIC678 17:50, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. I created the redirect from "Mădălina Diana Ghenea - Wikipedia" to Mădălina Diana Ghenea almost 7 years ago, because the original was a silly title. The original article/redirect does not need to live on. Regards, PKT(alk) 18:00, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all for the same reasons as PKT. --I dream of horses ^{(talk) (contribs)} _{Remember to ((ping)) me after replying off my talk page} 18:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all some of them make no sense, others are just Wikipedia added to the name. But none are needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per above. Not necessary to include "Wikipedia" when we're searching in Wikipedia; this is not Google. @PKT: Is that a WP:CSD#G7 then? ComplexRational (talk) 18:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I wasn't the author. I have no idea why I ever touched the article! I was probably patrolling New Pages, or something like that........ PKT(alk) 18:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all - We don't need these. Hog Farm (talk) 18:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete Crete wikipedia page as implausible and misleading; it is a leftover from a move only a few minutes after creation. I am not entirely decided on the others, but lean toward deletion as none seem particularly useful. Glades12 (talk) 18:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I have no memory of creating the redirect at Count to 10 in many languages wikipedia ten years ago, and I can think of no reason for having an article with a nonsense title like that. Even just "count to 10 in many languages" is doesn't seem useful. "count to 10 in many languages wikipedia" i can't even parse what that is supposed to mean. -lethe ^{talk +} 19:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all: I created Bhagyada balegara (song lyrics) wikipedia 5 years ago by moving the article away from that strange title, and am quite happy to see the redirect disappear. PamD 19:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete for all. These are better suited to be search terms on a search engine, not Wikipedia proper. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I remember this discussion, targets are not related to Wikipedia itself (e.g. Reliability of Wikipedia, Health information on Wikipedia , Dutch Wikipedia, Gender bias on Wikipedia etc. ) - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:40, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, they're unlikely Search terms. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Google is smart enough to make this useless, and no one is going to search this in the wikipedia search box. Natureium (talk) 15:05, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, and we should probably have a policy against this too somewhere. Perhaps alongside WP:RPURPOSE there should be a "reasons for *not* creating a redirect" as well as the reasons to delete one! | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 22:08, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Snow delete per all 13 !votes above. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:55, 18 April 2020 (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. SNOW close, it's basically an R3, so I've used that. Nick (talk) 15:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Please check on my new article → Rukenya Dam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This...just doesn't make any sense, and can refer to any article on Wikipedia. Regards, SONIC678 17:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Redirect probably mistakenly left behind from a page move. --Bsherr (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It could be one of my articles, or anyone's; it is not a plausible title or search term. ComplexRational (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ComplexRational: It couldn't be mine though, because I have no articles. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Leftover from an old page move to a better title, should have been deleted after the move in '14. Hog Farm (talk) 18:25, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, 'nuff said........PKT(alk) 18:57, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete. Given enough context it could apply to any article. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:05, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - six years ago I forgot to nominate this redirect for deletion... Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 00:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete could also refer to articles outside of Wikipedia. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this was the name of the article for a little over 20 minuets in May 2014 with no connection to the subject. There is no need for it. I think this could qualify as a WP:SNOW.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 01:43, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Snow – There is a clear consensus to delete this redirect. My rationale for deleting this redirect is that it violates WP:OWN. --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 05:15, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I agree. This isn't worth keeping at all. Somebody can probably close this immediately. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:45, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's sad that a CSD criteria couldn't be used to avoid this obvious discussion. Natureium (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Chaotic Neutral (example of a full article) → Alignment (Dungeons & Dragons)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'm not sure someone would search with this disambiguator...back in 2006, the page about its associated DnD alignment was moved from this title, turned into an article about the alignment, then redirected here, and later turned into a disambiguation page. Maybe delete this title, or if that doesn't work, retarget back to Chaotic Neutral? Regards, SONIC678 17:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Very unlikely search term. The out-of-standard disambiguation is clearly a relic of something that should never have been in article space and should have been handles in a sandbox (or nowadays in draft space, though that didn't exist at the time). There's no need to retain it, and the bare term goes to the proper disambiguation page. oknazevad (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no point in this redirect anymore..........PKT(alk) 18:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, unlikely search term. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We shouldn't keep this. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:35, 15 April 2020 (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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Keep Calm and Click Edit → Wikipedia:Vandalism#How not to respond to vandalism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Recently created and unused. The redirect target is just too narrow. This could just as easily point to pages concerning edit warring, disruptive editing, or several other conduct policies and guidelines. It ought to be deleted. Bsherr (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to WP:CALM, which seems like the most logical place for this to link to. I agree that it's a bit vague though, and I wouldn't miss it too much if it were deleted. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 19:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I would hesitate only because this phrase is not used in that essay, it's not a Wikipedia:Shortcut, and it's not a likely search term. So what would be the purpose of the redirect? --Bsherr (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The purpose would be as a tongue-in-cheek way to refer to the relevant page in talk page discussions, along the lines of, e.g. the various silly redirects to ANI. But yes, it's not all that useful and kind of vague, so I don't feel too strongly about it. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 23:57, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as ambiguous and may cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - As stated above, this is too vague. It relates to quite a bit, and no one single target would really fit. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:35, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep WP:CALM and Carry On per SpicyMilkBoy. --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 06:30, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not a valid search or link term. Natureium (talk) 16:57, 21 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:31, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Waluigi pinball → Mario Kart DS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't see why we need a redirect for one specific race track from this game, especially with an incorrectly capitalised title. It has never had any article content. – numbermaniac 14:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Agreed. We shouldn't keep this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:17, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:GAMECRUFT item 7. This track also appears in Mario Kart 7. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:56, 18 April 2020 (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 disambiguate. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Over to You → Never Say Die!  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Over to You: Ten Stories of Flyers and Flying. The Roald Dahl book is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC rather than the non-notable track on the Black Sabbath album. (A DAB hatnote for the song could be added to the Dahl book page if necessary.) Muzilon (talk) 10:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Possibly dabify There's an Olympic medalist horse "Over to You" List of Olympic medalists in equestrian, and a see also for Over to You Now -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  That's great research. I've gone ahead and made the disambiguation page and added a hatnote to the current target. I express no opinion as to whether and which is the primary topic, and thus whether the redirect should be retargeted. --Bsherr (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  The new Over To You (disambiguation) page is a good idea. However, I would tend to favor the redirect now being retargeted to that DAB page rather than the Black Sabbath song, which does not seem to have been the subject of WP:SIGCOV. Muzilon (talk) 19:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd support that --Bsherr (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Move dab over redirect. Per above. --Bsherr (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Move dab over redirect. With thanks to Bsherr. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Computer Science (art) → Information technology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Super obscure synonym, created from a page move. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 10:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - My first thought is that this ought to point to a different article, but then the redirect is rather unclear in the first place. Is it meant to involve artwork created with the aid of computers? Artwork portrayed on computers? Artwork created by computer programs themselves, running independently without people? Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:48, 16 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Original content → User-generated content  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect created in 2008. Pretty sure the target is not what it means today. Paul_012 (talk) 09:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - In this context, both "original" and "context" are fuzzy concepts. I'm inclined to think that we should simply let people use the search engine. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:34, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as ambiguous. Could also refer to copyright infringement issues, among other things. Narky Blert (talk) 10:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It's probably most likely to be encountered in the context of Content (media), but we don't seem to have relevant coverage, and the phrase is ambiguous anyway. – Uanfala (talk) 12:20, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This redirect may cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:02, 15 April 2020 (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) feminist #WearAMask😷 16:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Monobook → Wikipedia:Skin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:Monobook.js → MediaWiki:Monobook.js  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Found this discussion and thought this anomaly of targeting is worth a discussion here. I don't recommend a particular action at the moment, just throwing this out here for thoughts. — J947 ^[cont] 06:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The linked discussion was for a mainspace redirect, so it's not the same situation. This is a Wikipedia space redirect, and so only has to be "notable"/relevant in the context of Wikipedia, not the larger world. There's no harm in the redirect; on the contrary, what would be harmful is the lack of a redirect: a user looking for help or information about Monobook and finding nothing and not getting any result when they type in "Wikipedia:Monobook", which one would expect to find help or get useful information. —Lowellian (reply) 15:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Lowellian: Sorry, I didn't make it clear. There are two redirects being discussed here which have very similar names, but point to different targets. I made the discussion to sort out where these redirects should target; they probably should both target to the same place. I found this targeting anomaly by reading the closure of the aforementioned discussion. — J947 ^[cont] 20:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that they "should both target to the same place". Someone typing in "Wikipedia:Monobook" is probably looking for information about the skin or to edit the skin, and someone typing in "Wikipedia:Monobook.js" is probably looking for the JavaScript file, so they are not the same. —Lowellian (reply) 03:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

keep per this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:48, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Soulji → Monstercat#Current artists  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target. No other mention. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not mentioned anywhere else in WP. Useless redirect. Narky Blert (talk) 10:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - No notability and no reliable sourcing that I can see. It doesn't seem possible to discuss this person's musical career anywhere. I agree. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Enwiki has nothing about "Soulji". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:03, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Macedonia(kingdom history) → Macedonia (ancient kingdom)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Malformed disambiguator (missing a space before the open paren). Apologies if this is the wrong venue: this redirect does have history (it was an unsourced, rambling schoolboy essay created in 2010 and blanked-and-redirected 20 minutes later), but I do not think it has to be preserved as potentially useful content (it is not) or for the sake of licensing and attribution (it has not been copied/merged elsewhere, as far as I can tell). Cheers, gnu57 03:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and because the qualifier is ungrammatical. (Yes, this is the correct venue; and good background reaearch.) Narky Blert (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I agree. This seems to be a pretty clear-cut case. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: malformed disambiguator, implausible search term. This is absolutely the correct venue: we don't have qualms deleting unsalvageable content found in the the ancient layers of a redirect. – Uanfala (talk) 12:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, although it's a shame if the original content can't be merged elsewhere and preserved—perhaps it could be archived on the target's talk page. Personally I find it charming! P Aculeius (talk) 14:31, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: copied the rambling schooboy essay to the talk page of "Macedonia (ancient kingdom)", along with the perfectly accurate description given in the nomination above. Now nothing will be lost when the redirect is deleted. P Aculeius (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom --DannyS712 (talk) 07:46, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete precisely per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:04, 15 April 2020 (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 List of filename extensions (A–E)#CSPROJ. (non-admin closure) feminist #WearAMask😷 02:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• .csproj → Microsoft Visual Studio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Maybe add to List of filename extensions (A–E) and retarget? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I added the file extension to the list you mentioned. This is the C# project file for Microsoft Visual Studio. Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson (talk) 21:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: It is a reasonable search term for someone seeking Microsoft Visual Studio, but it would be less confusing if retargeted to the List of filename extensions (A–E), since it has now been added and provides a link to Microsoft Visual Studio. Someone who is trying to determine what the associated application is will be left without confirmation that Microsoft Visual Studio uses this extension if brought straight to the article on the application. —Quondum 12:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per User:Quondum. JIP | Talk 16:36, 18 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:26, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Nina Коvacheva → Nina Kovacheva  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The K and the o are Cyrillic. ((R from move)). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:10, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Redirects and titles with mixed alphabets are useless clutter, no-one can type them from a single keyboard. Narky Blert (talk) 02:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – at least for now – per K4. It is useful at the moment from old links and deletion doesn't help anyone. — J947 ^{(user | cont | ess)}, at 03:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. There's long-standing precedence for deleting redirects such as these. Steel1943 (talk) 05:40, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a redirect context, high utility with little drawback should definitely be considered a better argument than leaning back upon precedent. — J947 ^{(user | cont | ess)}, at 02:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Steel1943. Even if many people make a mistake, it's still a mistake, and keeping redirects such as these would only encourage that. ComplexRational (talk) 01:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Look. The pageviews here are from old links. They are not mistakes, just a result of the MediaWiki structure. There is nil point in deleting this redirect right now. — J947 ^[cont] 02:00, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Except for the unnecessary confusion of being offered two seemingly identical options in the searchbox. That just makes WP look bad. Narky Blert (talk) 04:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Narky Blert: So you're saying that such a minor anomaly as that outweighs K4 and the high prevalence of old links here? — J947 ^[cont] 05:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

      I'm saying that it's bad for the encyclopaedia and that WP:5P5 trumps the literal interpretation of all rules. Narky Blert (talk) 05:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

      • Please follow MOS:LISTGAP. So you're saying that minor confusion trumps helping 20-odd readers a month? The minor confusion is very unlikely to be found anyway – this is a ridiculously uncommon search term, the views presumably come from fairly-used old links which are pointless to break. — J947 ^[cont] 06:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Also – I don't know about others, but I can see in Vector the Cyrillic К as different from a normal K. — J947 ^[cont] 06:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • And following this discussion, I think it reasonable to surmise that many of the pageviews come from the two seemingly identical search options, which again proves that it is a mistake. ComplexRational (talk) 17:48, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

            I don't think so at all; the first time the target comes up in the dropdowns is when you have typed Nina Ko and the Cyrillic redirect never shows up in the dropdown menu – that's what happens to me, at least. — J947 ^[cont] 05:04, 15 April 2020 (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. --BDD (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The Office (U.S. season 1)/redirects → The Office (American season 1)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Office (U.S. season 2))/redirects → The Office (American season 2)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Office (U.S. season 3))/redirects → The Office (American season 3)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Office (U.S. season 4))/redirects → The Office (American season 4)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Office (U.S. season 5))/redirects → The Office (American season 5)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These redirects were left over from moves to get away from incoming links. Looking at their histories, they were kept to avoid "recklessly caus[ing] linkrot" in 2012, but it doesn't seem like anything links to them now, further making me wonder if we should still keep them here, or how useful they are. Also, the last four have double parentheses at the end. Regards, SONIC678 00:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unnecessary clutter. Accidental leftovers of no value from page moves. Narky Blert (talk) 04:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - None of these should be kept. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as per above. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. TheTVExpert (talk) 19:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. I also don't think Wikipedia supports referring to the United States as "the U.S." per MoS. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • MOS:US allows it. — J947 ^[cont] 05:07, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • There has been recent mass renaming of (UK TV series) and (U.S. TV series) pages, presumably to make them comply with MOS:US. I've never looked for the relevant discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 05:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom / above --DannyS712 (talk) 07:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. Unlikely search terms. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2020 (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.