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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Charleston College" → College of Charleston#History  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term due to the quotations that do not serve to make any specific portion of the title stand out. The version without the quotations marks, Charleston College, exists and is a redirect targeting the same location as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete My alma mater. I've never heard of anyone calling it Charleston College anyways. Muttnick (talk) 23:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• "Delete" per "nom," it doesn't make sense to "have the title in quotation marks," especially "when the correctly formatted" version exists. "Regards, SONIC678" 01:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unnecessary quotation marks. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:15, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Beirut thunderclap → 2020 Beirut explosion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A thunderclap by definition means either the literal weather occurrence thunder and lightning, or something that is unexpected. Can we say that about the explosions at Beirut? CaptainGalaxy 22:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete what matters is not whether this is literally correct, but whether this is a term that is used for this target (or a different one). Currently Google finds exactly one hit for this exact phrase, which is an automatically scraped list of Wikipedia article titles. Thryduulf (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I created it because I thought people might search for this term by allusion to the "Delft Thunderclap", another notable accidental explosion. Considering the lack of use, it can be deleted. Passengerpigeon (talk) 23:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A quick google search turned up only one result with no meaningful content. Nobody is calling it this. It "Delft Thunderclap" is likely only known by that name because it occurred before the word "explosion" came into its present meaning. It doesn't apply to any modern explosion. TornadoLGS (talk) 00:23, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I don't see that this term is likely to be used and it seems like it isn't at the moment. It's doing no harm by being there - there's no competing target for the serach phrase - but it can be deleted just out of a sense of tidiness. › Mortee _talk 04:07, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dr w → Doctor Who  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This seems too vague to just be linked to doctor who. From what i can tell many other Doctors beginning with w as well as a Dragon Ball character with the same name appears before Doctor Who when searching the term up. CaptainGalaxy 20:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Dr. Wily. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate. There are a lot of Doctor W's. Seventyfiveyears at 21:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. Search results would be preferable since next-to-none of such people/characters are known simply as "Dr. W". That, and such a disambiguation page would include some roads named "W" or going west. (Oh hmm ... is there a retargeting option somewhere?) Steel1943 (talk) 21:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  FWIW, I've been looking around on Wikipedia for a bit for a concept in an article which could explain how some countries use a naming convention such as "(ROAD NAME) (ROAD TYPE [or road type abbreviation]) (DIRECTION DESIGNATION)" where the "... (ROAD TYPE [or road type abbreviation]) (DIRECTION DESIGNATION)" could be "DR W", but I can't find any such information at the moment. Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Type "dr w" into the search box and a number of notable doctors are listed in the popup list. We don't know which one the reader wanted, so we shouldn't force them to Doctor Who. But if they really were looking for Dr Who then it appears within the first few entries of the popup list. So, this redirect has some bad side affects and isn't needed anyway.  Stepho  talk  23:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This redirect was probably created because in the Doctor Who story The Underwater Menace the Doctor signs his name "Dr. W" so it's a plausible search term even if doesn't exactly match. P-K3 (talk) 00:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t believe the term being used once in 1967 is enough to keep this.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 01:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What harm is it doing? This is an alias the character used in the show, so the redirect is plausible. P-K3 (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as ambiguousand to allow uninhibited Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete too ambiguous. So far the only connection to the target is that the character once wrote his name that way a single time over 50 years ago which I see as far too trivial a connection to say that anyone typing Dr. W nowadays are regularly looking for this particular character.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 16:01, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:54, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Krazyfest → List of attractions and events in the Louisville metropolitan area  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Seems as though this redirect should target the content formerly at Krazy Fest, which was deleted via WP:PROD in 2017. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Was requested at AfC, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-10-19#Krazyfest but was listed in List of attractions and events in the Louisville metropolitan area for just a day before being removed by Stevietheman. I guess it can safely be deleted. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Enwiki has a few mentions of this term but no substantive content about it and no mention at the current target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:13, 31 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• PO P → P.O.P  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I was considering retargeting this to Pop, a disambiguation page, but I don't see the combination of a lack of a space between two potential capitalized acronym letters, and then a space between the next set of letters, to be plausible as a search term. Steel1943 (talk) 19:50, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The album's artwork indicates P•O•P and not PO P. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:12, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Tiffin School Scott House → Tiffin School  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article, leaving the connection between the target and the redirect unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: It is hard to imagine that so many users are only interested in learning about this house at this school that their initial WP search would be this specific. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 20:03, 28 August 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 withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 01:09, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

It doesn't seem as though this is an alternative name for the target. I've been looking around third party search engines for a bit, and it looks as though two major results appear for this term: 1) a fictional character in Eternal (video game), and 2) possibly a site that mirrors Wikipedia with a probable claim this term refers to the subject at Izalco (volcano). Steel1943 (talk) 19:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The trail from the edit summary of the creation of this redirect leads to this old encyclopedia, where the term is apparently a typo (or possibly an unusual alternative spelling) for Izalco. If we're going by that, then it makes sense for the redirect to target whatever article is at Izalco (which is currently the one about the region, not the one about the volcano that's in it). Given that there are no other entities with the name mentioned on Wikipedia (and probably never will be any if a fictional character in a game is all else there is on the web), I don't see any harm in the redirect. – Uanfala (talk) 19:53, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's kind of my line of thinking, considering I saw a similar paper trail. However, I'm wondering if the fact that other sites mention "Izalio" as an alternative name is because the term was invented on Wikipedia, and was never an alternative name and/or spelling referenced by any non-WP:OR reference for the subject. (Something similar was determined at an RfD I initiated a few years back: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 20#Other nonmetal.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The old encyclopedia where this came from is about a century older than Wikipedia. – Uanfala (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, that answers that! Steel1943 (talk) 21:17, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Nintendo 604 → Nintendo 64  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I get what this means, it's trying to be a literal 64. However, this is not a helpful redirect. CaptainGalaxy 19:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This doesn't help, and it doesn't even really make sense phonetically. It would have to be "60 4" or "60-4" or something. -2pou (talk) 21:00, 28 August 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 Six Four. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Rokuyon → Nintendo 64  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

From what I can can gather, this is Japanese for Sixty Four, however since this doesn't have Nintendo at the front, it would have barely any connection to the console. CaptainGalaxy 18:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to 64 (number) Six Four with ((R from alternative language)) (ja|en) since it already exists and is WP:CHEAP. I wouldn't really oppose deletion, though, I just think this would be fun to poke the bear. -2pou (talk) 21:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure that per WP:FORRED that the redirect is needed since I doubt that a native English speaker looking up this number would use the Japanese term. It is a better choice than the current target though.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 00:29, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the target based on the the comment below. -2pou (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Six Four, a Japanese book whose original title is Rokuyon. Sixty four in Japanese would normally be rokujuuyon, and anyway the book is the only thing which isn't a WP:PTM and actually passes WP:FORRED. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:01, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me since due to Rokuyon being the actual Japanese title it’s the most plausible target.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 01:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! Updated my !vote above to match. Not as "fun" but better for the encyclopedia. -2pou (talk) 13:19, 31 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Nintendo 63 → Nintendo 64  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I can't find anything involving the title 63 anywhere. I'm pretty sure this just meant to be a joke. CaptainGalaxy 18:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Not helpful. -2pou (talk) 21:00, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I have never heard the Nintendo 64 referred to as such and share the the belief that this was created as a joke. Please not that the equally unlikely Nintendo 65 doesn’t redirect here.--67.68.208.64 (talk) 00:21, 29 August 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) CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Coinhive → Monero (cryptocurrency)#Implementations of Monero  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I believe that this redirect should be deleted since the specified paragraph of the page that it references is now gone. 77.139.59.160 (talk) 11:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, Coinhive is still mentioned at the target. We can remove the section targeting, but that's not a reason to delete the redirect. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:04, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Network (upcoming film) → Network (2019 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Boomerang (upcoming film) → Boomerang (2019 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Frankie (upcoming film) → Frankie (2019 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Truth (upcoming film) → The Truth (2019 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Twelve (upcoming film) → Charm City Kings  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 12 O'Clock Boys (upcoming film) → Charm City Kings  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No longer upcoming, and no links from the article namespace to any of these redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 18:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom. -2pou (talk) 20:25, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all because of potential future ambiguity. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:08, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Cerevisaphilia → Craft brewery and microbrewery  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Cerevisaphile → Craft brewery and microbrewery  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirects and the target article unclear. The definition of these words seems to be "love/lover of beer", but that's not what the target is about, and this concept is not exclusive to the target as Beer includes subtopics that are not "Craft brewery and microbrewery"-related. Steel1943 (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The term is used nowhere in Enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:10, 31 August 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems like a case of WP:RLOTE, this variety of wood is found all over the world; searching Google Scholar for this term only returned German results, suggesting that it's not used as a loanword in English. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Used in one of Neal Stephenson's books, which are written in English. MarkMLl (talk) 20:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Enwiki has nothing about "Kienspan". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @MarkMLl: I've never heard of Neal Stephenson until you mentioned him, so I found the article, proving he is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. So, the follow up question is: What is the name of the Neal Stephenson book which uses this word, and does the book have a Wikipedia article? Steel1943 (talk) 22:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Steel1943:It's in book two of "Quicksilver", which is the first volume of the The Baroque Cycle which forms the backstory of Cryptonomicon. The books are in the form of historical fiction with this section taking place in Central Europe circa 1680, and while most foreign terms are either explained or become obvious from context, the use of kienspan as a torch is described but not what it actually is. Therefore I suggest that the author is introducing it into English narrative as a loanword, which makes it notable. MarkMLl (talk) 18:40, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFFL. It's German for fatwood, see de:Kienspan. Narky Blert (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per MarkMLl's explanation of its usage as a loanworld. I would have voted differently if the redirect would conflict with other uses, but it doesn't, so the service to our readers to have the search engine redirect them to the corresponding article takes preference, even if its usage in the English language is very rare. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 09:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Added the term to the article in form of a footnote (adding it to the list of synonyms in the lede seemed to be too early at this stage of usage). --Matthiaspaul (talk) 09:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

   Reverted as inappropriate. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting a facts-based contribution to an article in the middle of the ongoing discussions and even accusing the contributor of original research in the face of MarkMLl's explanation of the word's usage in the English language looks like you are trying to suppress evidence. I therefore consider your reversion at this particular point in time as disruptive.

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, in the absence of any other noted English meaning of this word, the bar of "English usage" is not particularly high to warrant keeping it. ~ mazca ^talk 16:20, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:FORRED. I can't find any evidence of this being a loanword into English. One (admittedly badass) author using it in historical fiction doesn't warrant a redirect. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:08, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MarkMLl already gave evidence of the term's usage further above in the discussion (and I stated this in the article, reverted by you, so you obviously are aware of it). In my judgement, the redirect is warranted per the relevant guideline WP:REDIR. The usage seems to be rare, but that does not matter much. What matters in a RfD are guidelines - and applying good common sense. The cited essay (WP:RLOTE aka WP:RFFL aka WP:FORRED) does not reflect community consensus, thus is of little relevance to this discussion. If anything, WP:RDELETE #8 ("if the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful") could be a valid reason for deletion depending on interpretation, but it is countered by WP:RKEEP #3 ("They aid searches on certain terms") and #5 ("Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.") Checking the purposes for why redirects are created (see guideline WP:RPURPOSE), points #1 ("Alternative names redirect to the most appropriate article title") and #8 ("Alternate forms of a name as found in reliable sources and common databases") apply to some extent. I consider an English book which is actually using the term as top-class evidence in regard to the term's usage in the English language. As the usage nevertheless is rare, the arguments need to be weighted and good common sense applied. But in the end the guideline-based Keep-argument "Someone finds them useful" is difficult to overturn unless an argument could be found for the entry to be harmful (like being in the way of another article, which it, however, is not). A book reader actually might want to know what "Kienspan" is, so the search engine should redirect to the relevant article. Therefore: Keep.

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. WP:RFFL is sound; it prevents generating literally countless links that have no place in en WP. A single author of a single book using this is far from sufficient; there's probably tons of English books using tons of foreign terms for their own obscure (or mistaken) reasons. If the bar were that low we'd be back to countless foreign links, wasting our attention and time to repeatedly wonder about what they mean and why they exist every time some editor comes across them. This is why we don't keep any and all redirects anyone creates. --A D Monroe III^(talk) 01:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's a red herring as we are not talking about tons of foreign terms, but a specific one. From your argumentation above it appears as if you prioritize easier maintenance over good user experience. While it is good if both can be had at the same time (f.e. by leaving a good edit summary on a redirect's purpose), the priority should always be on the best-possible user experience in querying an encyclopedia (because that's why we are here).

In most cases there are sound reasons for the existence of redirects, but at the minimum they exist because someone found them useful (which typically involves some suboptimal situation this user ran into earlier which triggered him or her to add the redirect to make the experience less unpleasant for others -- the cited "hint" further above might be eye-opening). Of course, sometimes an editor is confused or mistaken and the redirect needs to be taken care of in some form, but this redirect is not one of them. It is not only useful as it is, it is actually desirable as a redirect from a loanword per the relevant guideline. It might be rarely used, but it is not obscure (per the evidence above).

We even keep redirects from typos (something I personally do not endorse unless it is for very common ones), so the threshold for inclusion is actually very low (also per WP:CHEAP). Basically, for redirects which are not misleading or total junk, the threshold is about where it would get in the way of something more useful. But getting redirected to the proper place is desirable, and not getting a hit in the search engine is the opposite of good user experience and not helpful to our target audience at all.

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 03:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It looks like this would've been deleted uncontroversially if not for one novelist's usage. Since those novels are set in historical Europe, claiming such usage has introduced the term into modern English as a loanword seems rather premature and speculative. --BDD (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What does this have to do with historical or modern English? The novelist in question is still alive and the books are modern works, even if set in a historical context. But even if the term would be used only historically, the fact that Kienspan is used as an English word satisfies the definition of loanword already. The only thing that is debatable is if it is in frequent use, and certainly it is not. But does this really matter? The redirect is useful per the criteria given in our guideline on redirects (outlined and referred to in details above already), and it is not in the way of another page, so why delete it? Even if it only helps a few people / readers of the books, still it does. Deleting it does not help anyone. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, frequency of usage very much matters. See WP:RFD#DELETE #8 ("novel or obscure synonym"). WP:NEO is a similar policy, if not specifically about redirects. --BDD (talk) 20:11, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I mentioned WP:RDELETE #8 as well already, but I see it being more than neutralized by WP:RKEEP #3 and #5, and also backed up by WP:RPURPOSE #1 and #8. Wikipedia would be a pale shadow of itself if we would only cover mainstream topics - in fact, the less common topics are the most interesting ones (for as long as they are properly sourced, of course). --Matthiaspaul (talk) 00:04, 11 September 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. Early close since the "Jay Kaye" mentioning is now restored. Closing discussion as well since the keep votes seem obvious and specific enough. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 11:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Jay Kaye → Mary Kaye  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I do not understand why this page redirects to the Mary Kaye" article. Besides, it's not even mentioned in that page. Seventyfiveyears at 16:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Googling for Jay Kaye finds his websire where (according to the google snippet) he states that he is Mary Kaye's son. The website isn't presently working for me, but the Internet Archive version does back that up. This was mentioned in the article, albeit unsourced, until "jay+kaye" this edit by jpgordon in May this year. The edit summary ("tightened") does not make it clear whether the removal was solely due to it being unsourced or some other concern and there is no relevant discussion on the talk page. If a sentence mentioning him is readded to the destination article then this would be a perfectly normal redirect from a family member to the article about their notable relation as it doesn't appear he is notable in his own right. Thryduulf (talk) 16:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - jpgordon removed (without explanation) information on her son, Jay Kaye. I re-added the info and added citations. He does not deserve his own Wikipedia page, but anyone searching Wikipedia for Jay Kaye or Suddenly One Summer ‎ should redirect to Mary Kaye. Kingturtle = (talk) 17:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep now a notable mention is restored. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:02, 31 August 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 no consensus. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:52, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

This redirect is not mentioned anywhere in the "Neoaves" article. So obviously, the redirect is misleading and confusing. Seventyfiveyears at 13:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Obvious delete - and I realize we're encouraged to come here, but this could easily be a g6. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 14:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or retarget to Neognathae, and I'm not sure which one. (This redirect has existed since 2012, so its creation has nothing to do with current events.) Third party search engines are showing this to be some sort of clade described by someone named "John H. Boyd" (I don't think they have a Wikipedia article), but I'm not sure if the lowest-level parent topic is the current target or Neognathae, where this redirect is linked and mentioned. However, the section which mentions this redirect, Neognathae#Taxonomy and systematics, states this redirect is essentially a subtopic of the current target. So, either way, deletion helps no one. (On a related note, I'm going to ping Plantdrew who has been quite helpful in the past figuring this stuff out.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:14, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Coronaves was described by Fain & Houde in 2004, but Boyd's website is what is bringing it visibility. It represents a hypothesis that is not compatible with any of the classifications currently presented in Neoaves (Coronaves includes the three orders mentioned as "orphaned", among other differences). Without digging into it especially deeply, I get the sense that the Coronaves hypothesis has been abandoned. Neoaves references a 2019 paper by Houde makes no mention of Coronaves (if Houde wanted to continue to recognize it, he could have presented a new circumscription). Neoaves is the narrowest clade with an article that includes all the taxa that were included in Coronaves, so if kept, I'd be inclined to redirect there rather than the broader Neognathae. I'm not sure how much Neoaves should be cluttered up with obsolete classifications though (it's one thing to present a classification that stood for 100 years and was overturned by molecular phylogeny; it's another thing to include a churn of molecular phylogenetic results that are abandoned after 15 years or less). I think the best solution would be creating an article, with deletion as next best (Metaves has an article and was also proposed by Fain & Houde in 2004). Plantdrew (talk) 01:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We usually don't delete redirects for obsolete terms, I don't know what the harm is in keeping this one? As long as someone searching for it will get to an article that approximately covers the same ground. FunkMonk (talk) 14:17, 23 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• "Wood science" → Forest product  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The quotations make this redirect unlikely and WP:COSTLY. The version of this redirect without quotations, Wood science, exists. Steel1943 (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the quotations make this redirect implausible. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, as this is definitely an unlikely redirect with the quotes. I'm not even sure I like the non-quoted version's target either - it's a poor article that doesn't mention the term - but that's a separate discussion. ~ mazca ^talk 18:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete given that the unquoted version exists. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:57, 31 August 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 per SNOW. (non-admin closure) — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:WPJ → Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also be an acronym of WikiProJect. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 14:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Yes in theory, no in practice. If you were right, we'd expect to see many shortcuts like WP:WPJUSA, WP:WPJBIRDS, WP:WPJFOOTY, etc. Looking at all pages in Wikipedia space that begin with WPJ, the only such usage is WP:WPJGUIDE (n.b., it is not to an individual WikiProject). --BDD (talk) 14:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BDD. This seems like another failure to do proper WP:BEFORE. Additionally, even if it was ambiguous in practice that would not necessarily be an issue as shortcut redirects do not have to be unambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BDD. The argument to delete makes no logical sense. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - WPJ seems to almost never be used for Wikiproject, and this is a very long-standing project space redirect (2007), so any tampering with this will be disruptive. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:19, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• J-Zay → Jay-Z  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible redirect, barely close to its target name. Seventyfiveyears at 14:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete for the fact that it's not a phonetic misspelling. I could see "Jay-Zee" or "J-Zee", but not this it is pronounced "Jay-Zay", which isn't a match. Steel1943 (talk) 15:00, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Bagyong → Typhoon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bagyong Yolanda → Typhoon Haiyan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bagyong Ondoy → Typhoon Ketsana  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bagyong is a Filipino word for "Typhoon", but we don't have other redirects like Bagyong Sepat, Bagyong Etau, Bagyong Malakas, etc. So these are the only mentions of "Bagyong" in enwiki. Seventyfiveyears at 12:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I have created the redirect for Bagyong. CaptainGalaxy 12:33, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I had to put Bagyong on this list because it was recently created. Seventyfiveyears at 12:41, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:RFOREIGN, as the term Bagyong is used officially by regions affected by typhoons. In addition, you bring up points that we should include the name for other typhoons. CaptainGalaxy 12:53, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Captain Galaxy, though I would recommend against creation of such redirects for typhoons that don't affect the Philippines. --BDD (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'll agree to that. CaptainGalaxy 18:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• No comment for first, but keep for the final two (Bagyong Ondoy and Bagyong Yolanda). These are the Philippine names of two of the most notable and devastating typhoons that struck our country. Also per Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English as said by Captain Galaxy. For BDD's suggestion, I might leave the matter to other editors JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:14, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  To clarify, I do find the first acceptable per RLOTE. --BDD (talk) 18:23, 31 August 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 both per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Macdonald's → McDonald's  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MacDonald's → McDonald's  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible redirects. "Mc" is pronounced "MICK", while "Mac" is pronounced "MACK". Seventyfiveyears at 12:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both. In most cases, "Mc" vs. "Mac" are plausible misspellings of each other. This is not an exception. Steel1943 (talk) 12:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both. It does't matter how it spelt in this situation but more accents and dialect. For example, I know a lot of people who call it Mack instead of Mick. Apparently, this can also extend to the Mandela Effect. CaptainGalaxy 12:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an example [1]. CaptainGalaxy 12:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both in many accents "Mc" and "Mac" are homophones as either /mæk/ or /mək/, and the restaurant plays on the similarities by selling both a Big Mac and McNuggets. This means that these redirects are very likely search terms. Thryduulf (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both, plausible error per above. Hog Farm _Bacon 18:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both as its common for some people to emphasize "MACK"-Donald's in speech (sometimes humorously, sometimes out of habit), and this would be the phonetic form. -2pou (talk) 20:30, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both per everyone above. Who cares how "Mc" is pronounced, or even how it's capitalized? Either way is a plausible way to write "McDonald's." Regards, SONIC678 21:19, 28 August 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 move to Perverted Justice (website) without leaving a redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Perverted-Justice.com/MediaRevision → Perverted-Justice  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per the history of this page, seems this title was used as sort of a draft/sandbox for a couple of week in 2006. As a search term though, it's confusing and unclear. If the edit history needs to be preserved, then at the minimum, this redirect should be moved to a plausible search term for its target. Steel1943 (talk) 01:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. If the history keeps to be kept, it could be merged into Perverted-Justice, whose website is perverted-justice.com. Narky Blert (talk) 06:08, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge history: 1) Delete the target, 2) move the redirect to the target, 3) delete the redirect, 4) undelete everything. Aasim 16:26, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to something like Perverted Justice (website) without leaving a redirect. We can still have a histmerge in the future without polluting mainspace. --BDD (talk) 19:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Move per BDD, seems like a simple and workable solution that creates a potentially useful redirect. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:51, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Move per BDD without leaving behind a redirect, as this is going to be simpler than histmerging. – Uanfala (talk) 00:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Move as BDD explained. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 23:08, 16 September 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• GameCube 2 → Wii  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I can't find anything stating the Wii was ever called the Gamecube 2 not even when it was Project Revolution. I'd say this is quite misleading. CaptainGalaxy 11:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The only mentions I can find of anything called GameCube 2 are (a) alternate history and (b) a change.org petition from ~2013 asking Nintendo to make a GameCube 2 that garnered 43 supports. Everything else is matches of strings like "GameCube 2 player games" or people offering GameCubes for sale with 2 controllers or 2 games. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The Wii is not the “GameCube 2”, it’s a separate console. Maka, the Two Star Meister! (talk·✉) 22:01, 28 August 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 2020 Alaska earthquake. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft:2020 Alaska Earthquake → List of earthquakes in 2020#July  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There already is an article which is found on the page about the 2020 Alaska Peninsula earthquake. CaptainGalaxy 11:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to 2020 Alaska earthquake, basically reverting this edit by a bot probably after the aforementioned page was erroneously converted to a redirect to a "July" title and since the content that was at 2020 Alaska Peninsula earthquake was moved to 2020 Alaska earthquake. Steel1943 (talk) 11:44, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hero (upcoming film) → Hero (2019 Tamil film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete: not upcoming. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. "Hero (2019 film)" was already released. Seventyfiveyears at 00:36, 29 August 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 Luther Vandross discography#Soundtracks. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hero (Luther Vandross album) → Luther Vandross  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The article Luther Vandross does not mention an album Hero', and Luther Vandross discography refers only to Hero (1992 film) which does not mention a soundtrack or Vandross. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to Luther Vandross discography#Soundtracks. I could see a reader misremembering "Heart of a Hero" from Hero as such. --BDD (talk) 14:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Luther Vandross discography#Soundtracks per BDD. CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:53, 5 September 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Origin of the species → On the Origin of Species  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Does not seem like the alternative name of Darwin's enlightening book. Therefore, retarget to an article about the origin of species in general. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 10:07, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep 100% of google searches for this exact phrase down to page 6 are for this target (with some claiming it as the original title, although I haven't attempted to verify this). Even when searching for "Origin of the species" -"On the origin of species" all but 1 result on the first four pages of google are for Darwin's work (and that exception is an Answers in Genesis page arguing against it). Only when excluding Darwin from search results do I get anything else, and even then there is no primary topic - topics associated with Led Zeppelin, Homer (poet), The Rolling Stones, Spider Man, a play and an Indian book about genealogy are on the first page of results. Accordingly, it is extremely unlikely that someone using this search term is looking for anything other than the current target. A new dab page linked in a hatnote or an extension of the existing Origin of Species (disambiguation) could be created if desired though. Thryduulf (talk) 12:58, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I’ve taken the liberty to add the phrasing to the hatnote. — Timwi (talk) 15:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect – not uncommon as an error, and clearly search engines tend to assume that, but there are a couple of alternative uses so Origin of Species (disambiguation) is a better target, and I really don't think it's helpful having it in the hatnote, as that just seems to legitimise the error which can come from thinking that "the species" is humanity. . . dave souza, talk 17:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Searchers making this error are more likely to want Darwin than the entry on a disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, since hatnote has already been modified in target article. Darwin's work is clearly the primary topic here, no need to have this retarget anywhere else. CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:44, 4 September 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 Hero (disambiguation)#Mythology. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hero (Greek mythology) → Hero and Leander  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is ambiguous because it may refer to Greek hero cult, or to Hero generally, or to the character in Hero and Leander, or to Hero (mythology). The best solution may be retarget to Hero (disambiguation). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Unsure if this should be retarget to Hero (disambiguation)#Mythology or to Greek hero cult, which is about the concept in Greek mythology and is the target of redirects like Greek hero. A similar decision will need to be made about Hero (mythology): in addition to the above two potential targets, there's a third – the main article Hero. – Uanfala (talk) 16:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Hero (disambiguation)#Mythology. --FocalPoint (talk) 18:16, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hero (2014 film) → Hero (2015 Hindi film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The article says this film was released in Sep 2015. Note that "Hero (20xx film) is highly ambiguous: see Hero (disambiguation). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:48, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Very implausible redirect. Seventyfiveyears at 00:38, 29 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Kir(Case Closed) → Case Closed  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Malformed title; Kir (Case Closed) already exists as a redirect. Slashme (talk) 09:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RDAB precedence. Steel1943 (talk) 15:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, why should this exist when the correctly formatted counterpart already does? Regards, SONIC678 15:45, 28 August 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:38, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Could also mean other stuff called "Sprache". Therefore, dabify. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 06:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Question what is there to disambiguate that isn't a WP:PTM and does not violate MOS:DABOTHERLANG? 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Nothing else to disambiguate it with, so leave as is. PamD 07:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep per the above. Nothing to disambiguate it with. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per CycloneYoris. There are plenty of partial title matches, which is not unexpected for a common word like this, but there are presently no articles about anything else that could, in English, be referred to as just "Sprache" so there is nothing to disambiguate it with. Thryduulf (talk) 09:18, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, that's the ISO 4 way of abbreviating this journal (and equivalent to simply dropping the 'The' in Lancet vs The Lancet)., Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:49, 28 August 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) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:30, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Hadzuki Fujiwara → List of Ojamajo Doremi characters#Main characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Character does not exist, Hadzuki is a typo, replacement redirect page Hazuki Fujiwara also exists Rctgamer3 (talk) 05:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep not a typo (づ is in fact historically romanised as dzu, see e.g. Hepburn romanization#Second version or [2], and is also usually typed that way in Japanese input methods) and not ambiguous with anything else. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This redirect is completely implausible. Seventyfiveyears at 14:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the IP. You'll see a lot of these for names that can be translated with minor variations when brought to English. -2pou (talk) 16:34, 28 August 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 speedy retarget to Americas (terminology). which was the stable target for fourteen years before it was adjusted recently with no visible justification. Participants are unanimous that the change was not helpful. ~ mazca ^talk 19:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Definitions of North America and Northern America → United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The United States isn't the only country in North America. Maka, the Two Star Meister! (talk·✉) 02:49, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert to target Americas (terminology) which was stable for 14 years before 2804:1054:3010:4920:1058:7f71:471e:6ce0 retargeted it to America for no good reason. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 04:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Target to Americas (terminology). As noted by IP above, the redirect name has nothing to do with being exclusive to the U.S., and is in fact just the opposite. --A D Monroe III^(talk) 04:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above. Thryduulf (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget back to Americas (terminology), which would better describe the title of the redirect. Regards, SONIC678 21:26, 28 August 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.