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. Especially with the election concluded, I don't see how this discussion will arrive at a different result. No prejudice against drafting an article in user or draft space, but do note the concerns here if you want to go that route. --BDD (talk) 16:08, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Princess Blanding → Killing of Marcus-David Peters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is this the best target? She's a candidate for governor this year, might want to redirect there. Alternatively, between this incident and the governor's race, she may be notable enough for her own article. I'm neutral on the matter for now. Smartyllama (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not Retarget I doubt an article on her would survive an AFD, and her campaign material makes clear her campaign is related to the tragic killing of her brother discussed at the target. There is an argument to retarget to 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election, but I think there should be more material at the current target. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:27, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Hm. For context, I started the Killing of Marcus-David Peters page. I too think she might not get past AfD which is too bad because simply as far as organizing the information goes, a dedicated page on her seems like the best solution; I sort of think it would be undue to have a whole lot more about her campaign on the page about his death. I think she's probably a bit under covered on the election page but so is every candidate; there’s not much prose at all. But that leaves unresolved the question of where she should be targeted. I guess either way, it should definitely link to the other? I’ll add that to the MDP page. Innisfree987 (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse separate article: Ballotpedia is treating her as a serious candidate with a full bio. The NYT is including her in the election results. Politico and National Review have articles on her along with multiple Virginia TV news sites and NY Magazine. Sounds like a pass of GNG separate from MDP killing. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Unelected political candidates are nearly always an AfD fail, except for national office. It would have to be an argument about the combination of those sources and those related to her brother (though on that score I believe the current redirect was instated an AfC draft on Blanding was declined by another editor saying WP:NOTINHERITED.) If you want to give it a go anyway I would probably support IAR as the best way to present encyclopedic info—just saying it could be an uphill battle. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:03, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Separate article: With ese two events, she is definitely notable enough for a separate article. ~BappleBusiness^[talk] 01:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. She doesn't pass WP:NPOL so she would have to pass WP:GNG for a separate article. If someone feels that she passes GNG, then they can always start an article—you don't need an RfD for that. To the question of whether Killing of Marcus-David Peters or 2021 Virginia gubernatorial election, I think the current target is better. She is an activist first and foremost and that article better explains her background and activism. Her run for governor is an offshoot of that; it was to bring attention to her cause, not because she actually thought she could become governor. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:55, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per 力 and Tavix. She got 0.7% of votes in the concluded election, and there is very little information about her in that target, which makes it less likely as a significant target. Jay (talk) 05:05, 12 November 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 Resolved with the addition of a hatnote to the dab page. If someone thinks the dab page should be primary then start a requested move discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:00, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• CFML → ColdFusion Markup Language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect page CFML makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. If they enter “CFML” and press enter, it redirects to ColdFusion Markup Language with no chance of finding CFML (disambiguation), CFML-FM, and CFIX (AM). — WILDSTAR^talk 10:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added the missing standard hatnote at ColdFusion Markup Language. I see that a hatnote was added in 2008 but lost somewhere along the way. The dab page is also currently malformed .. will have a go at fixing it. PamD 10:25, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. PamD 10:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I see that there was a hatnote until WildStar removed it when they created the dab page, perhaps not knowing that there must always be a hatnote pointing to the disambiguation page in a case like this (where a redirect is the primary topic for a word or abbreviation, not an uncommon situation, eg EA). All now sorted, I think. PamD 10:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PamD correct. I did at first change it, and later removed it while creating the dab page, thinking it could stand on its own without the need for those two redirects. Thanks for sorting! — WILDSTAR^talk 11:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As the technical creator of this page, I would like to note that I actually created it as a disambiguation page from the jump — only later on did somebody else convert it into a straight redirect to cold fusion markup language with no provision for disambiguating the radio stations at all, and then the disambiguation page itself was only just created a day or two ago by the nominator here. The base topic should indeed be the dab page rather than a straight redirect to just one of the options, so the redirect should be deleted and the dab page moved back to where it used to be. Bearcat (talk) 11:58, 26 October 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 Resolved - see #CFML. Thryduulf (talk) 12:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cfml → ColdFusion Markup Language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect page Cfml makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. If they enter “cfml” and press enter, it redirects to ColdFusion Markup Language with no chance of finding CFML (disambiguation), CFML-FM, and CFIX (AM). — WILDSTAR^talk 09:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• See above (should these two be bundled together - not sure how to do it). PamD 10:32, 26 October 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) feminist (+) 05:12, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Windows 95/98/ME/NT/2000/XP → Microsoft Windows version history  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term, rather WP:XY as well. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:50, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (as creator): this redirect was created in 2006 as part of one of the "missing topic" projects which listed topics from various encyclopedias as candidates for article creation, or in many cases, WP:CHEAP redirects to existing articles. This one was from The Free Dictionary topic list I believe, so probably from the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia originally. This exact phrase (sometimes also including "/Vista") is probably not as unlikely as you might think, appearing quite commonly in compatibility notices and hardware/software manuals of the early 2000s encompassing all 32-bit versions of the Windows operating system. --Canley (talk) 04:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. 305 hits last year shows that this is not an unlikely search term (Canley's comment explains why) and given the target covers everything in the redirect there are no XY issues so the nomination statement is completely wrong. Thryduulf (talk) 09:17, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Canley, apparently not so unlikely as it sounds (and I note it does sound very unlikely). I don't see an XY issue. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:28, 26 October 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 Moral high ground. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 13:28, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Moral supremacy → Moral absolutism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This seems like it may be better fit as a redirect to Moral high ground than to Moral absolutism, so I propose that the redirect be retargeted along those lines. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate between the two topics -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Moral high ground as per CycloneYoris with ((R to related)). See for example, Eminent_Victorians#Significance for an example of usage with this connotation. There are other similar. Coastside (talk) 04:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Just a note that there was no vote by CycloneYoris on this. Jay (talk) 05:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per others, but put an explanatory hatnote there. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget and hatnote per Shhhnotsoloud. Jay (talk) 05:16, 12 November 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.