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. ✗plicit 03:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Natinal customs → Culture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Natinal" is not a typo that we provide navigation for. The only examples of it are Bhutanese natinal anthem (currently at RfD), and Natinals (where it's deliberate as a reference to a historic gaffe). – Uanfala (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment if not deleted, it should be retargeted as a misspelling to National Customs. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely redirect at best --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:25, 10 December 2021 (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! 00:26, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

No idea why this is targetting Die Glocke (hoax) or Die Glocke. —Kusma (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wenceslas Mine is part of the fringe lore surrounding Die Glocke [1], but no WP:RS that is WP:FRIND can be cited, so it goes unmentioned in our article. - LuckyLouie (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. After a lengthy discussion on the talk page, Talk:Die Glocke (hoax)#Description section, menition of the mine has been reinstated. Note that User:LuckyLouie has agreed in that discussion that the mine should be targeted there. SpinningSpark 17:03, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep After some digging, existing WP:RS were found to justify the redirect. - - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:38, 15 December 2021 (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. Jay (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Governor's Scholars Program → Kentucky Governor's Scholars Program  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete per WP:NOPRIMARY: many other states have "Governor's Scholars Programs" UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Per above. Aasim (talk) 01:08, 10 December 2021 (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. As the word (read as Ray) is ambiguous. Jay (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Рай → Paradise (2016 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is actually a redirect that I created, but I’m kind of confused about. Рай is actually the mere Russian name of “Paradise”, but I made the target the 2016 film instead because the film is Russian. Should we retarget this redirect to “Paradise” or keep the current redirect target? Thanks. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — SANDBOXES — LOGS — 17:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Delete per Uanfala. I think that people searching for Рай would be more likely to want the movie with that name in Russian than Paradise as a concept. If it were to just redirect to Paradise, it would likely be deleted by running afoul of WP:RFOREIGN. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 20:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The redirect is ambiguous on Wikipedia: there's also Ray, Belgorod Oblast, Ray (Smolensk region), and a bunch of other topics that we don't yet have articles for (see ru:Рай). Redirecting to a suitably expanded dab page Ray is conceivable, but there are so many unrelated entries there that readers will be much better served by the search results. – Uanfala (talk) 23:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Uanfala: I wasn’t considering deletion initially, but you do have a point. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — SANDBOXES — LOGS — 23:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. User Rosguill marked my redirect as reviewed (assuming without flaws), so I didn’t really know whether or not to put it here at RfD in the first place. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CONTRIBS — SANDBOXES — LOGS — 03:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Uanfala. My original thinking was essentially the same as Snood1205's point above, but in light of the additional topics found by Uanfala I think the latter argument is more compelling. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 06:28, 9 December 2021 (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. Jay (talk) 21:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Astronomy Mercury → Mercury (planet)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Astronomy Io → Io (moon)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Astronomy Rhea → Rhea (moon)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Astronomy Titan → Titan (moon)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Created in a single batch in 2004, these redirects represent a style of disambiguation that hasn't caught on since. It will be a disservice to readers to provide for a general search strategy that only works in a dozen cases. The terms themselves are vague and ambiguous. "Astronomy Mars" can conceivably refer to Mars as a topic in astronomy, but it's also plausible for Astronomy on Mars (with the corresponding material for the other planets available in the sections of Extraterrestrial sky). – Uanfala (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all as implausible search terms. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: All implausible redirects. Aasim (talk) 01:08, 10 December 2021 (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. Seems uncontentious to clarify the alternatives. (non-admin closure) Chumpih. (talk) 05:36, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• QRNG → Hardware random number generator  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

QRNG could mean a Quantum Random Number Generator, or a Quasi-Random Number Generator. At the moment it's just a redirect to Hardware random number generator. Perhaps this page should be changed to a Disambiguation type, with links to Hardware random number generator and Low-discrepancy sequence respectively. OK to change from a Redirect to a Disambiguate? Chumpih. (talk) 08:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambig there's also quinolone-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 03:20, 9 December 2021 (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 all except −6, which had no consensus to delete. As a disambiguation page has already been started there, I'll leave that as it is. It can be deleted at WP:Afd if needed. Aervanath (talk) 20:12, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• −3 → 3  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• -3 → 3  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −4 → 4  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −6 → 6  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −7 → 7  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −8 → 8  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −9 → 9  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• −10 → 10  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The additive inverses are not explicitly described at the number articles, so these redirects are not particularly helpful for the reader. Looking at deletions like Special:Redirect/logid/24922761, Special:Redirect/logid/24922757, Special:Redirect/logid/24922754, it appears that there has been some previous discussion regarding this (possibly concerning articles rather than redirects though); however, the WikiProject in the summary is a redlink. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:35, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume WP:WikiProject Numbers, although I don't see a 2009 discussion on the subject. Maybe the 2006 Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/-19? Tarl N. (discuss) 13:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't see any relevant discussion at WT:WikiProject Numbers either. Vaguely relevant previous RfDs are Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 12#-4 (number) and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 January 9#–999. Certes (talk) 14:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks, I didn't notice the link in the deletion summary had a typo. Not sure whether a 2006 AfD could be reasonably referred to as "consensus within WikiProject Numbers" (and that in 2009), but the discussions linked by Certes appear to show sufficient previous consensus too. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - we need to do something, the current redirects aren't sensible at all. Maybe a retarget to Negative number? Otherwise, delete or convert to a stub with a view to awaiting them being added as encyclopedic topics later.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:53, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• We have Minus Six (a pop rock group), Minus six (exile) (a Soviet punishment) and Negative Ten, a redirect to a fictional character not mentioned in its target. Certes (talk) 15:04, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, @Certes, −6 appears to be a good candidate for disambiguation, as already done with −5. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Are we interested in these?

  • Dash 6, an aircraft
  • Dash 7, a wireless protocol, an aircraft and a locomotive
  • Dash 8, an aircraft and a locomotive
  • Dash 9, a locomotive
  • Dash 10, a radar countermeasure

  I've never seen any of them written as hyphen+digit, but it's a plausible misspelling. Certes (talk) 15:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Certes hyphen, maybe. Except for the "-3" redirect, all redirects nominated here use a minus sign. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:46, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 06:26, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 14:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the 3 and 4 redirects, disambiguate Minus six and retarget –6 there, and retarget the 7–10 redirects to the "Dash #" pages. Not seeing anywhere to point the 3 and 4 redirects; the others we can pool in with existing possible meanings. Generally though I don't think we need the negative numbers to redirect to the number articles, and there appears to be some rough prior consensus against doing so. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:13, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I find it very unlikely that somebody looking for the "Dash #" articles would use "−#" rather than "–#" or "-#". It should also be considered that readers might be looking for information on the negative numbers even if we don't have such. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the 7–10 redirects. If these are truly the minus sign, then I agree they are unlikely search terms to refer to the "Dash #" articles. I could be persuaded to keep targeting the positive number articles, but so far the discussion is not persuasive to do so. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist to allow the November 19 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:37, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I can't see any of these redirects being more useful than the usual page search interactions. Chumpih. (talk) 12:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete −3 and −4, disambiguate the rest. I think the −6 redirect was candidated for disambiguation right now. 2405:9800:BA31:F6:A1B4:3655:3EF1:C0A0 (talk) 01:17, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. Unlikely route for someone who wants the number articles. If the user is looking for something explicitly on the negative number they are going to be sadly disappointed. We shouldn't create redirects for something on which we have no information – that only frustrates and annoys our readers.

I don't see the benefit of creating disambiguation pages either. None of the potential targets use "−#" and few know how to type the minus sign. It is only beneficial if it was shown that that rendering is actually used for any of these topics. Then there would be the possibility of readers cutting and pasting it, but no evidence has been presented that this is a possibility. SpinningSpark 11:04, 18 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 14:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Parker Coppins. → Parker Plays  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect was created as an article, nominated for speedy deletion, and turned into a redirect to Parker Plays. The same things happened to the now-redirect Parker Coppins (no period). However, the title of Parker Coppins. (with a period) isn't a particularly useful redirect. Because this was previously an article, I'm not using R3. See, for a similar discussion, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 14#Barack Obama.. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 23:00, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This was my compromise as the article did not belong in mainspace and yet was not obviously deletable A7 (as tagged) or G11 (more debateable), and Parker Plays has better written & sourced biographical content. I hadn't realised the same content was also in the history of Parker Coppins. Perhaps the version with the full stop could be speedy deleted A10 as a duplicate that adds no useful content to Parker Plays; the material is somewhat different but as it's completely unsourced it isn't useful for expansion. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: error with trailing full stop. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Quick delete the page with '.' serves no purpose. Chumpih. (talk) 12:48, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as implausible since this was created along with the properly redirected one. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 05:34, 12 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 14:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Bhutanese natinal anthem → Bhutanese national anthem  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect was created as a result of a page move, and is in fact a double redirect that ultimately leads to Druk tsendhen. I don't think "Bhutanese natinal anthem" is a particularly useful typo to maintain as a redirect, so rather than repoint the redirect to Druk tsendhen, I'd instead recommend that it be deleted outright. ModernDayTrilobite (talk) 14:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:42, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For the only reason that this redirect was at the incorrect spelling from 2007 until it was moved last week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:24, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Quick delete appears plausible. Chumpih. (talk) 12:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. We generally aim to preserve redirects that were formerly the titles of articles, but all we have here is the fact that this redirect has existed since 2007, and that's not much of a reason for keeping. – Uanfala (talk) 23:26, 8 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 14:03, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Robert George Adams → Perpetual motion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Adams motor → Perpetual motion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Adams Motor → Perpetual motion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

no incoming links and no mention in any article Leschnei (talk) 14:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete No info on wiki, can't find anything off-wiki either. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 15:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This, Adams motor and Adams Motor once all pointed to an article about a particular proposed perpetual motion machine design: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adams motor and [2]. It looks like it ended up being merged into the main perpetual motion article, then all trace of the Adams motor, and its inventor, disappeared from the main article. As such, it serves no purpose any more. -- The Anome (talk) 16:40, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The additional entries Adams motor and Adams Motor were included but not tagged, which I have done now. There are no users to tag as they are inactive now. (50+ registered users contributed to Adams motor from 2004 to 2012.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a potential article, the Adams motor seems to have coverage in several books. I also found an article where it is concluded that some of the claims by patent author about the alleged perpetual machine did not manifest. --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:45, 9 December 2021 (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 Mydriasis. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Eye dilation → Pupillary response  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Mydriasis as that is more specific than Pupillary response snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 03:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Mydriasis per nom. Mdewman6 (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Mydriasis makes sense. Chumpih. (talk) 12:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Mydriasis: Per above Aasim (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 03:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Squad (upcoming film) → Squad (2021 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The movie Squad (2021 film) came out in mid-November, so this is not "upcoming". jp×g 03:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – No need for this to exist as the film is already out. Precedent^[1] supports^[2] deleting^[3] these^[4] redirects^[5]. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 03:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete seems plausible. Chumpih. (talk) 12:45, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

• Delete per precedent --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:27, 9 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 03:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hindu tithi → Template:Hindu tithi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Invalid cross-namespace redirect to a template. jp×g 02:57, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to create a template called "Hindu tithi" but failed to use the namespace "template:". That is how this page came to be created. Subsequently I realized my mistake and, if my memory serves me right, moved the page to the "template:" namespace. In my opinion, this page "Hindu tithi" is no longer required, not even as a redirect. Kishorekumar 62 (talk) 04:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plausible. delete. Chumpih. (talk) 12:47, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Creator is also fine with deletion. --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:15, 9 December 2021 (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. ✗plicit 03:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• The World's Most Famous Arena → Madison Square Garden  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Subjective name, and not a recognized nickname for Madison Square Garden that appears anywhere in the article. jp×g 02:43, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A quick Google search of the phrase and everything comes back to MSG. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 03:28, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While both Google and Bing showing this, we could do with some evidence that "The World's Most Famous Arena" is actually a search term on Wikipedia, per Natural under WP:CRITERIA. In the absence of this evidence, delete. Chumpih. (talk) 08:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Very subjective. Even if MSG is referred to as this, so can other arenas through marketing. Aasim (talk) 01:11, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it isn't the world's most famous arena. If it's referring to hockey arenas, that would be the Forum. If it's other kinds of arena's there's the Coliseum. Basketball courts aren't called arenas, so that's out. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 13:24, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Basketball venues most certainly are called arenas. See List of National Basketball Association arenas. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:29, 10 December 2021 (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.