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 18:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:NOTGOOGLETRANSLATE → Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Google  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to have been inspired by a satirical redlink I used in a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_16#Alle_Rechte_vorbehalten. However, the essay this points to is about notability, while Google Translate is about languages. This should either be retargeted to Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English or deleted, depending on if this is deemed helpful to the project. I personally don't think it should be a listed redirect at the Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English page if it's retargeted there. Hog Farm (talk) 21:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The target does not have anything to do with Google translate, and neither does the suggested retarget—although it's a bit closer. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Target has nothing to do with Google Translate. The other alternatives seem a stretch at best, especially considering they are not part of the current target page, and most readers would be expecting to find a section of the current target page when searching WP terms that start with "NOT". Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 1 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• LÚGano De Yarrell → Yellow-faced siskin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• LUGano De Yarrell → Yellow-faced siskin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be a hard miscapitalisation of the Spanish name for the target, so WP:RLOE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• WÉAk Delete. While the article says this bird is found in Venezuela and Brazil, I don't know if it has any particular affinity to the Spanish language. About the capitalization, I can see someone holding the ⇧ Shift key for too long for the second one. I'm also leaning a bit more strongly towards delete on the first one since there's no Ú key on a lot of keyboards. Regards, SONIC678 21:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFFL and for the miscapitalisations and the obscurity. Lúgano de Yarrell is mentioned as a common name is several good ornithological sites; but it may not to be a well-known one, because es:Spinus yarrellii doesn't mention it. According both to that article and to species:Spinus yarrellii, the usual Spanish common name is jilguero cariamarillo. Narky Blert (talk) 08:06, 25 March 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 21:01, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Plucentric language → Pluricentric language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a plausible typo, as two characters are absent with no obvious reason why, and the topic is never referred to as "plucentric" on or off wiki. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete – not a plausible typo or abbreviation. Kanguole 19:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Implausible typo. Narky Blert (talk) 08:07, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete per WP:R3. I can maybe see Plurcentric, but not Plucentric. OcelotCreeper (talk) 02:01, 26 March 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 20:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Addition of the extra vowel makes than an unlikely typo/misspelling, as substantiated by 23 pageviews last year. [1] Hog Farm (talk) 05:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, it's hard to see that this is really needed, and one could have fun making up variant spellings ... no, won't go there. Actually 23 happy visitors might well mean this cheap redirect is worth keeping? I'd be happy to go along with consensus either way. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:CHEAP, does appear to be useful occasionally. Polyamorph (talk) 11:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is a character named Ganadalf in World of Warcraft. If that character somehow becomes popular, then we should encourage people to create an article about that character. Also Gandalf is already in the top of the search box by the time one would place the n. OcelotCreeper (talk) 15:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @OcelotCreeper: I might be inclined to consider that argument per something in a similiar vein to WP:RDEL#D10. However, the google results for this term leads to player characters who have taken that name, not npcs (please correct me if I am mistaken). Thus, I think it is extremely unlikely for those individual players to gain notability. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 14:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:CHEAP, it's a weird misspelling but not implausible readers might make it. SnowFire (talk) 20:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete page creator here. I have zero recollection of creating this and have no idea what I was trying to achieve in doing so; I couldn't even justify this right now if you asked me to. -FASTILY 22:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:CHEAP. What the heck, 23 people got help last year, so why not? GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 12:19, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With 365 days a year, 23 views in technically 1 view every 16 days. OcelotCreeper (talk) 01:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:RTYPO. Singular error; not harmful. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 14:30, 27 March 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 8/5. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 18:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 8-5 → Working time#Workweek structure  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target. In my experience, "N–5" for values of n other than 9 are not implicitly about working hours, but this was hard to confirm via internet search because that also includes results for other punctuation mark, making most of the results about 8.5% (which is neither here nor there). Other possible meanings of "8-5" could be August 5th or May 8th, which are disambiguated at 8/5. I'm not sure whether redirecting to there or deleting is a better solution. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I hear people talk about 8 to 5 all the time. It's not normally 9 to 5 because there are 8 hours of work and 1/2-1 hour for lunch. I don't know of many full times nowadays that are only 8 to 5.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 20:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  https://medium.com/the-ascent/its-time-to-kill-the-eight-to-five-job-8ca18db66951

  https://apideltech.com/recruitment-is-no-longer-an-8-5-job-heres-why/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naddruf (talk • contribs) 20:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Either Keep or Retarget to 8/5, per nominator. Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:20, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to DAB page 8/5 as ((R from modification)) ((R from ambiguous term)). Narky Blert (talk) 05:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Target to dab 8/5; I've added an entry there for Working time#Workweek structure. The rcats should be ((R from modification)), ((R from ambiguous term)), and ((R unprintworthy)). — J947 ^{(user | cont | ess)}, at 23:10, 31 March 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. Note that the retarget vote is merely refining to a section of the current target, so I'm closing this as keep without prejudice toward the addition of section targeting. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:56, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Morrell Park Elementary/Middle School → Morrell Park, Baltimore  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It is mentioned at the target, but the school does not appear notable in itself and there is no substantial or sourced content there. It thus seems of low utility to readers. ComplexRational (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Redirects don't need to be notable (like articles), they need to be useful. Apparently, someone found it useful enough to create the redirect (which is a valid reason to keep it per WP:R#KEEP unless on of the reasons to WP:R#DELETE would apply). If this is the correct spelling and it is not in conflict with a name needed for another article, this is exactly the type of redirect we want to see, reliably redirecting a reader to what bits of info we have about it. Also, if there would be links to this redirect in the future, the existance of redirects like this aids reverse lookup of (other) information. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 10:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I went to this school and they use "Morrel Park Elementary/Middle School" for a lot of things plus I'm pretty sure that name is on the school itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by St. Jimmy Jammy (talk • contribs) 13:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Mentioned in the target, which gives some useful information. Notability is irrelevant for redirects, only utility; which is why templates like ((R from song)) and ((R to section)) exist. Narky Blert (talk) 08:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Morrell Park, Baltimore#Schools per above. — J947 ^{(user | cont | ess)}, at 01:05, 30 March 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. Yes, already the .NET Framework can be meant, I see now. (non-admin closure) 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dot NET → .net (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should probably redirect to .net. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The .net (disambiguation) page has several possible targets for "dot NET", and the "NET" being capitalized implies that there could be other potential targets beyond lowercase ".net" per WP:DIFFCAPS. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There's several entries at the current target with "NET" in allcaps, and some of these look like the capitalization makes a difference. Hog Farm (talk) 21:07, 24 March 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 20:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Couks → .uk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Couk → .uk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Does not make any sense. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. There's also a redirect Couk, same target, which is presumably intended to represent ".co.uk", but even that is tenuous and should probably be deleted too. Rosbif73 (talk) 18:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added it to the nomination as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Is it supposed to mean .co.uk? Who would forget both periods? OcelotCreeper (talk) 01:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Different sources, such as this history book, appear to state that 'Couk' is a real surname. However, is there anybody of that name that's been notable enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia previously? I can't really tell. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:54, 30 March 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 20:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Julio CA(c)sar ChA!vez → Julio César Chávez  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term for the subject Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 16:58, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy per WP:R3. --Soumyabrata ^{wash your hands} _{to protect from coronavirus} 17:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Soumya-8974: We have already been over this. Have you forgotten already? -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, I forgot because I am concerning on the COVID-19 pandemic. --Soumyabrata ^{wash your hands} _{to protect from coronavirus} 17:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Implausible redirect. --Soumyabrata ^{wash your hands} _{to protect from coronavirus} 17:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• DE(c)lete! Created by bot as ASCII-only variant of the later deleted mojibake redirect Julio César Chávez, see also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 November 22. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Utterly useless. Hog Farm (talk) 21:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete© Useless redirect! Not a very active user (talk) 15:08, 30 March 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 20:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ænglish → English language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Would probably rather refer to Old English (Ænglisc), although I don't think this is very useful. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, a plausible misspelling of Ænglisc. Some modern-day languages, like English or Spanish, end in -ish, but none of the most common ones end in -isc, so readers unfamiliar with old languages might accidentally spell Ænglisc with an -ish in the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not a very active user (talk • contribs) 15:03, 30 March 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 the redundant one, keep the second one. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Citizenship Amendment Act protests in CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi → Citizenship Amendment Act protests  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi → Citizenship Amendment Act protests  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The creator made a bunch of redirects of this sort which are all fine, but this one has a redundant clause and minor grammatical issues which suggest it was created in error. I think it's a bit too old for WP:R3 but should be deleted, as there are a number of these and there has been talk of creating sub-articles at some of these titles. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – CAA protests works fine. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 17:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Ivanvector and Soumya-8974:, Please take a look at this and this.

• Keep CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi
• Delete CAA protests in CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi.

Italawar (talk) 04:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: CAA protests in CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi is currently nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 22#CAA protests in CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi. Steel1943 (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi and delete the "CAA protests in CAA protests" redirects per Italawar and Ivanvector (the page is unlikely to be searched for using the last repetitive ones, which is part of why we don't have redirects like Battles of Battles of Lexington and Concord or Sanctions against sanctions against North Korea). Regards, SONIC678 20:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's a typing error, should be deleted. Hemant Dabral^Talk 12:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Steel1943: What is unclear with this nomination? Every vote was delete; I'm joining the previous speakers. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:43, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @1234qwer1234qwer4: Thanks for the ping. I failed to update the reason why I relisted; since CAA protests in National Capital Territory of Delhi has been mentioned multiple times in the discussion, I added it to the discussion, as well as put a nomination tag on it. Steel1943 (talk) 17:56, 24 March 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 (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Portugese india → Portuguese India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Two misspellings. Maybe recreate with correct capitalisation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. One misspelling, one wrong capitalisation. Portuguese India is a good title, and the only one needed. It crops up in the searchbox without contortions. Narky Blert (talk) 21:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Narky Blert. Cabayi (talk) 09:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - page views suggest it's a plausible error. Portuguese is an odd word to spell for non-native writers, and miscapitalizations are generally always plausible errors (many people don't put capitals in their search keywords). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Therefore I suggested to recreate it with the correct capitalisation, as the search box automatically chooses a capitalised variant if the one with no capitalisation doesn't exist (in this case, too, the lack of the page Portugese India is probably the reason for the high pageviews count – the capitalised version gets normalised). 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's just busywork, though. The search box also chooses a non-capitalized variant if the capitalized title does not exist. If you search on "Portugese India" in the current state, you get to Portuguese India. Or you would if the RfD banner wasn't on the redirect. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 10:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I've seen Portugese as a misspelling frequently, and not all users search with the shift key - a learned habit, since most web browsers don't distinguish between case in searches. Hog Farm (talk) 04:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Portugese is a plausible misspelling considering that the u is silent, and, as stated previously, some users search without capitalising (for various reasons: laziness, not knowing that titles are case-sensitive in MediaWiki, or simply learning the habit). The pageviews tool shows roughly one view a day, which I consider enough to pass K5. Glades12 (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - As stated above, the misspelling appears particularly plausible. This seems helpful to me. Let's leave it alone. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as helpful per above; searching through the URL does not correct for capitalisation differences. — J947 ^{(user | cont | ess)}, at 01:17, 30 March 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 keep. Thanks to Matthiaspaul for the quick reaction. (non-admin closure) 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• .acc → GEM (desktop environment)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at redirect target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Now the article mentions .acc. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 13:05, 24 March 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 02:05, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ricky Martin's ninth studio albun → Ricky Martin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This page was moved to "Ricky Martin's ninth studio album" to correct the spelling error, which was later deleted, yet somehow this one has survived all these years after the move. While "albun" might be a plausible misspelling for "album" (as per TISM's The White Albun), I'm tilting towards delete here. Regards, SONIC678 01:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The correctly-spelled redirect has been deleted. Retaining the incorrectly-spelled one is pointless. Narky Blert (talk) 12:53, 24 March 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.