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. ✗plicit 01:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Queen of country → Honorific nicknames in popular music  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous, many singers mentioned at target are referred to as the "Queen of country". I suggest deletion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:59, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep. An highly plausible but ambiguous search term that redirects to a target that lists all the people to whom that search term applies is exactly the sort of redirect we should have. It's unfortunate that the list there is not sortable by title, but that's not a reason delete. Your argument would make sense only if the redirect targetted a specific person AND there was no list or disambiguation page, but neither of those are true. Thryduulf (talk) 00:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as the list ensures that the honorific can apply to more than one person. If you need a "Queen of country redirects here. Not to be confused with Queen and Country" kind of hatnote that can be arranged. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:30, 20 July 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. MBisanz ^talk 00:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• See food diet → List of diets  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not listed at the target; I believe that this term comes from the joke I'm on a see food diet; I see it, and then I eat it, and thus is not a real diet and is unlikely to merit inclusion at the target. Delete unless a consensus to include at the target is formed. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget I would suggest a retarget to Diet (nutrition). UserTwoSix (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Unless/until there is content on WP about this term in the context of a joke, users are unlikely to find anything useful by taking them to information about real diets where it is not mentioned. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as the joke doesn't really correlate to any particular diet. It could be weakly redirected to Serving size since the subject is portion control, but I don't see the phrase connected to portion control. And for the most part, you eat what you have set out to eat. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 03:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Pescetarianism as a ((R avoided double redirect)) of Seafood diet for which it is a plausible error (hence the existence of the joke). Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• See if we have any list of jokes on food, or if it can be included in List of linguistic example sentences, or some article from Category:Phonology. Delete otherwise. It is not a misspelling of Sea food. Jay ^(Talk) 06:18, 20 July 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 procedural close - see WP:RM/TR. 19:16, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

• Brian L. Frye → Brian L. Frye (filmmaker)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

G6. Redirect blocking a move. The Brian L. Frye (filmmaker) page should be here. lethargilistic (talk) 18:45, 19 July 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 23:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• EL Rise → Category:Television production companies of South Korea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Creative Leaders Group Eight → Category:Television production companies of South Korea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As is not at target, also we don't do redirects from namespace to categories as far as I know. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Rubbish computer: Redirects from the article namespace to the category namespace are a thing, and there is no harm in them as a general concept, indeed there are 738 categorised at Category:Redirects to category space. While most of those 738 are pseudonamespace redirects or from projectspace, there are examples like Flora of New South Wales → Category:Flora of New South Wales. The true number is greater though as for example neither of these redirects were categorised. Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know Thryduulf. I've decided to keep the delete vote as is not at target, but have struck that statement. Thanks, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. These are not helpful cross-namespace redirects. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:36, 21 July 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 23:44, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Largest village in Russia → Kanevskaya  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Largest village in the USA → Arlington Heights, Illinois  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Largest village in Poland → Kozy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Largest village in Kazakhstan → Beyneu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Largest village in Finland → Hyrylä  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unsourced claim at the target (in some cases missing altogethr), likely a WP:COSTLY redirect as the title of largest village in a country is subject to change. Our lists for the actual villages for these countries are subdivided by federal region (in the case of Kazakhstan and Finland, we appear to lack a list altogether), and thus there isn't a single target where the largest village can consistently and easily be found, so I would suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Way too costly to be justified. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete because there is no clear definition of what a village is, except for the fact that villages, by common dictionary definition, are not large. We would essentially have to link to a city whose population is closest to, but still below, a threshold between village and city, that will be different in every country. Not to mention, many countries, including English-speaking ones, have no definition of village at all. In the USA, every single state has different ways of defining and recognizing populated places, so the largest village in the USA redirect is especially bad. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:48, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete . Misuse of redirects. Such statements must be articless whihc set the criterria. How it is larhets, bu population, by area, . Also suppose a village gets the town status . Who will update the redirect target? Lembit Staan (talk) 23:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Questions and sources I have sources for all these countries, citypopulation.de list for Kazakhstan lists all settlements with at least 20,000 residents and whether they are cities, urban-type settlements (equivalent of town status), or villages, with Beyneu coming up as the largest of all places with village status in 2021 with a population of 56,000 Here is the reference http://www.citypopulation.de/en/kazakhstan/cities/. As for Russia, the sources are very similar to Kazakhstan. The difference is www.citypopulation.de lists all settlements by federal district, with Kanevskaya (population 43,700) being the largest place labelled as a village if you search through all the 8 federal districts. The source for Russia is http://www.citypopulation.de/en/russia/. As for Finland, the sources are a bit more complicated, but Nurmijarvi, Tuusula, and Kirkkonummi are the 3 biggest rural municipalities in Finland according both to Wikipedia and citypopulation . I have looked through the Finnish Wikipedia about largest settlements in each one and within those 3 municipalities Hyryla is the largest locality in those 3 rural municipalities, with a population of 21,000( https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyryl%C3%A4) to even 30,000 ( according to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_19&action=edit&section=6). However citypopulation does treat Hyryla as an extension of Helsinki's urban sprawl making Kirkkonummi proper the largest rural settlement in Finland. For Poland, citypopulation.de lists all urban and rural localities but the list are found per voivodeship and in 8 voivodeships by sub region. I have looked through all the lists and Kozy is the largest one with 12,000 inhabitants in 2011. As of 2017 it is still accurate as the Polish Wikipedia reports 13,000 inhabitants in Kozy and 11,700 in Kozieglowy, Poland's second largest village. For the USA, both citypopulation.de and Wikipedia have lists of villages and other all incorporated municipalities per state. They both list whether the municipality is a city, town, village, borough, or township and their. However Wikipedia's lists' populations are outdated as they list the 2010 census. But Citypopulation.de does list 2019 estimates and just like Wikipedia says Arlington Heights is the largest place that is labelled as a village on Citypopulation.de. US census and statistics websites also have the latest population lists and classification of whether the place is a city, town, village, borough, township, CDP, or other unincorporated locality/area statutes like gores or unorganized territories. In Canada, Wikipedia lists all villages and their populations per province and territory. Citypopulation.de however does not include all incorporated places as some of them in certain provinces fall under county subdivision which are sometimes treated as municipalities in which Bible Hill does. The same goes with Statistics Canada. Looking through all the lists of villages per province on Wikipedia, Bible Hill is by far the largest with 8,900 inhabitants in the 2011 census. While the population of Bible Hill is outdated and there is a lack of sources showing the 2016 census population for Bible Hill, it is likely it is still the largest village in Canada, the second largest one Greenwood, NS, is smaller by 3600 residents. I really hope that now that I have shown you the sources and where to find this information, that this could save these redirects from getting deleted. I did not create these redirects because someone wants to search for example Kanevskaya as if "Largest village in Russia" was an alternative name for it. I have created these redirects so that people don't have to do tons of research to find out what the largest village in a country is. Information on what a country's largest village is, usually remains near non-existent (often due to language barriers as these sources often are in a different language and sometimes alphabet) and often requires years of research (like I did) and this research often has to be done by geography geeks who most people aren't. These redirects solve a ton of searching issues. The other issue, which is a village outgrowing a country's largest village or a village becoming a town or city remains more debatable than the lists and sources for what a country's largest village is. In the USA, even though that Arlington Heights as of 2019 is the largest village, the second largest village is Bolingbrook, Illinois which is smaller by only 200 people, and the third largest is Schaumburg, Illinois which is smaller than Arlington Heights by 2000 people, so in that case Bolingbrook or Schaumburg could very easily surpass Arlington Heights anytime, especially with the 2020 census results coming out very soon. While there are villages of at least 50,000 in other states such as Hempstead, NY or Wellington, FL, their populations are unlikely to brake the record of America's largest village soon. In Finland, similarly to the US, Kirkkonummi can surpass Hyryla quite easily in the near future unless the 30,000 inhabitants is the more accurate source of what Hyryla's population is. As for Russia, the gap between Kanevskaya's population and the second largest Dinskaya is only 4000 inhabitants, and Russia's municipalities often show unexpected growth. As for Kazakhstan Uzynagash the second largest village has 40,000 inhabitants and is smaller than by Beyneu by 16,000 inhabitants. Uzynagash also has a slower population growth rate than Beyneu, so it is unlikely to outgrow Beyneu as Kazakhstan's largest village in the near future. In Canada as mentioned before the second largest village is nearly half the size of the largest and also has a stagnating population while the largest one continues to grow, so it is unlikely to change anytime soon. Poland's populations of villages generally do not grow fast, so it is also for the near future unlikely to change. In Poland and Russia villages do often get their status upgraded so that could easily also change of what the largest village is. In Finland occasionally rural municipalities become cities. I don't know about Kazakhstan, but in most US states villages or towns are rarely upgraded to city status. Illinois has not upgraded a village or town to city status in ages, so it is very unlikely that Arlington Heights, Schaumburg, or Bolingbrook will become towns or cities anytime soon if ever. They also have no plans to. In Canada while towns do get upgraded to city status quite often, villages very rarely become towns. So Canada's status of a largest village is also unlikely to change anytime soon, if ever. A solution for saving these redirects from deletion because of chances of villages outgrowing the largest village or villages becoming towns or cities is to retarget them to the second largest village if the time comes. I know this is a very long paragraph but I have written it so that these facts are taken into consideration so that all or some of these redirects can stay. --Otis the Texan (talk) 22:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Lembit Staan. Look at the sub-categories and lists at Category:Lists by area and Category:Lists by population. See Category:Lists of superlatives, we have the biggest, largest, longest, oldest lists for everything (where it makes sense). See List of largest cities that has a sortable table, and depending on the column chosen, we get a different No. 1 city. Lists are where such information should be, and readers should look for. Jay ^(Talk) 16:39, 24 July 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 Enhanced interrogation techniques#Development of techniques and training. ✗plicit 23:46, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Verschärfte Vernehmung → Interrogation#Germany  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article. As you can see by the german article de:Verschärfte Vernehmung it is a notable topic and should be redlinked to encourage article creation. (t · c) buidhe 14:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Why would this be an article in enwiki? Does the term translate to enhanced interrogation (as mentioned in Enhanced interrogation techniques), Interrogation in Germany, or Interrogation in Nazi Germany? Jay ^(Talk) 16:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Based on the Google Translate rendering of the German article, "" was a euphemistic name used by "police administration during the Nazi era to describe certain forms of physical and / or psychological torture that were routinely used in the context of police interrogations.". The article also notes that the term "Advanced Interrogation Techniques" used by George W. Bush-era CIA directly translates to "Verschärfte Vernehmung" in German and that "not only would there be a linguistic parallel between the terms "intensified interrogation" and "enhanced interrogation", but the actual processes that were hidden behind these two similar terms were also very similar in substance." So to answer your question I'd say the subject of the article is interrogation in Nazi Germany. The article would not be at this title on the English Wikipedia though, but something like Interrogation in Nazi Germany, Interrogation techniques in Nazi Germany or Enhanced interrogation in Nazi Germany. The section at the target article was deleted in 2015, but it consisted only of a see-also to the de.wp article and a template noting the section had been empty since at least 2012. Thryduulf (talk) 00:38, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Enhanced interrogation techniques#Development of techniques and training where the term is mentioned. Mark it as a ((R with possibilities)). Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Enhanced interrogation techniques#Development of techniques and training where this is mentioned. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:39, 20 July 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 SARS-CoV-2 Epsilon variant. ✗plicit 11:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• CAL.20C → Variants of SARS-CoV-2#CAL.20C  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• B.1.427 → Variants of SARS-CoV-2#Epsilon (lineages B.1.429, B.1.427, CAL.20C)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• B.1.429 → Variants of SARS-CoV-2#Epsilon (lineages B.1.429, B.1.427, CAL.20C)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is there any reason for these to not redirect to the more specific SARS-CoV-2 Epsilon variant? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:24, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom, that's a more detailed target. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 11:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget To answer the question: The reason for pointing to the current link target rather than the suggested new one is simply that the latter didn't exist when the redirect was created. Of course, it makes sense to retarget the redirect now.

BTW. In cases as obvious as this one, a full blown RfD is not required. Checking for redirects to be retargetted is normally a process carried out when new articles are created, but seems to have been forgotten in this case. I therefore suggest to simply retarget and close the discussion in order to avoid resources being wasted in an unnecessary discussion.

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 12:06, 19 July 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. That having been said, editors are welcome to have a go at creating a stub if they can find sources hat establish notability. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Alexandr Kalinin → Aleksandr Kalinin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Alexandr Kalinin is the name of a Moldovan politician. This redirect should be deleted to promote article creation. The redirect has gotten 50 views in the last 30 days and most were from yesterday, 11 July, day in which Moldova held a parliamentary election in which Kalinin participated, so people aren't searching this name with the hope of seeing the Russian footballer Aleksandr Kalinin. Super Ψ Dro 07:35, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, he is mentioned by fairly prominent Romanian and Moldovan newspapers. I'll list those with an article here on Wikipedia: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty ([1], Moldovan edition which doesn't have a page so this maybe doesn't count), ProTV Chișinău ([2]), HotNews ([3]), TV8 ([4]), Adevărul ([5]), Unimedia ([6]) and Radio Chișinău ([7]). He's a notable individual. Super Ψ Dro 07:43, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also delete Alexander Kalinin to avoid further confusion. Super Ψ Dro 07:48, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @Super Dromaeosaurus: The outcome of this RfD probably depends on whether an article about the Moldovan politician is viable. I am not entirely convinced by your sources that he is notable via WP:GNG, but you could try your luck at WP:AFC with a stub ("Alexandr Kalinin is a Moldovan politician. He has been elected to $OFFICE in $YEAR.") If he was an elected member of parliament, be sure to mention it, that is relevant for WP:NPOL).

If the Moldovan politician is not notable, then keep redirects as-is, assuming they are correct transliterations of the Russian name.

If the Moldovan politician is notable, create an article about him, add a hatnote on both pages; Alexander Kalinin should probably still go to the Russian target (because an alternative transliteration is somewhat more plausible than a typo). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Create stub Assuming the politician is notable, I would create the stub article out of the redirect and hatnote the two to each other. If you're not sure if he meets notability yet, create it in draft and ask for it to be reviewed once you have enough GNG sources. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Create stub I double checked, he is the leader of a party which is taking part in Moldovan elections, and I started writing its article, Party of Regions of Moldova‎. Lembit Staan (talk) 00:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Any future article about the Moldovan politician can be disambiguated with a hatnote. There's really no option: it cannot be deleted because it's a legitimate alternate transliteration, and "create stub" is an option not likely to be executed by any RfD closer. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:41, 21 July 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 Platform#Arts. MBisanz ^talk 19:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Platform film → The Platform (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nonstandard disambiguation format. As with below, sounds more like a kind of film than a particular film; "platform" can have a number of meanings in a media context. I suggest we delete, but if kept this should be retargeted to Platform#Arts, like Platform (film). -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 12:09, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I changed the redirect to Tamzin's suggestion and hope that it can now be kept. LaceyUF (talk) 12:27, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Edit reverted. Please do not change the target of redirects under active discussion at WP:RFD. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:48, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as ambiguous and likely to confuse. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:48, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete ambiguous term, but also no properly named articles to support a disambiguation page. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Platform#Arts per nom. Highly plausible but ambiguous search term with a directly relevant section of a disambiguation page already existing. I don't understand why anybody is considering anything other than a retarget? We don't require people know our arbitrary titling conventions before being allowed to find the content they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as ambiguous. What first comes to mind is OTT platform film, such as a Netflix original film. I cannot find a proper target in that direction, and the best I see are Streaming media, Over-the-top media service etc. which are too broad for "film". Oppose retarget to the Platform DAB or any sub-sections for the reason that it does not have an entry for OTT platforms or video streaming platforms. Jay ^(Talk) 16:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:SOFIXIT. If those things are actually referred to as "platform film" (a quick google suggests they possibly aren't) then they should be disambiguated. If they aren't then there is no call for them to be on a disambiguation page and there is no issue. Thryduulf (talk) 19:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Jay's points. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:27, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Platform#Arts per nom as there are multiple films with the title. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC) updated 15:24, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can't say there's something called a "platform film" like there is for the platform video game term. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:25, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Thryduulf. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:03, 29 July 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.