< August 21
August 23 >

August 22

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 22, 2022.

Mary Charlton (Q18762037)

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 23:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 21#Wikidata redirects * Pppery * it has begun... 23:53, 22 August 2022 (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.

Wikipedia:EE

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! 21:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

WP:EE currently redirects to WP:WikiProject EastEnders, an inactive WikiProject about a British Soap Opera. This is by and large not the dominant use of the term "EE" on Wikipedia; in particular I find that the acronym is used far more often to refer to Eastern Europe rather than to the British television show. As such, I propose that we retarget the redirect to either WP:WikiProject Eastern Europe or WP:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:52, 22 August 2022 (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.

Flatiron Partners

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Flatiron Partners

Donald Trump and Twitter

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 Social media use by Donald Trump. Unanimous consensus to unrefine/retarget to top of article (non-admin closure) TartarTorte 19:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should these redirects point to the top of the Social media use by Donald Trump article or the Twitter section? My view is that the top of the article is preferable, given that the majority of the article, and the majority of the lead section, are about Trump's use of Twitter, and the reader is more likely to arrive at a thorough understanding of Trump's use of Twitter from reading the lead section followed by the Twitter section than vice versa. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:05, 22 August 2022 (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.

République dominicaine

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) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the French did annex the Dominican Republic for 14 years, it was not called République dominicaine. During that era, it was part of French "Saint-Domingue", and as there is very little french spoken in the modern Dominical Republic, this seems like WP:RLOTE to me. TartarTorte 16:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I was unable to verify the claim that French and English are mandatory courses of instruction in the Dominican Republic, having searched both our relevant Wikipedia articles and Google Scholar. As the validity of the non-weak keep !vote hinges on this claim, relisting for further clarity.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill: Figure I'll ping Headbomb since your relist comment is in direct response to their vote in an attempt to have them clarify. Steel1943 (talk) 18:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill: Dominican Republic#Languages: Schools are based on a Spanish educational model; English and French are mandatory foreign languages in both private and public schools,[187]... Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Headbomb, looking at that claim (I had gone straight to Education in the Dominican Republic and Languages of the Dominican Republic, which make no such claim), the sources don't seem to back it up. I can't find any mention of French, English, or foreign languages in the source that the claim is directly cited to ([1]), and the following citation attached to although the quality of foreign languages teaching is poor.([2]) mentions English instruction, but not French (and FWIW does not suggest that English is actually a mandatory subject at the moment). My sense is that the information at Dominican Republic is incorrect and should be removed. signed, Rosguill talk 19:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If so, the historical connection and the close relations with Haiti should still be enough for a keep. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll note that [3] mentions French/English as mandatory, but this is possibly a citogenesis kinda thing. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:44, 22 August 2022 (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.

Gravity Wars

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 23:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The company released no game by this name, and the title does not occur in the target article. IceWelder [✉] 16:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:47, 22 August 2022 (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.

Hario V60

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Hario V60

No Server November

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 23:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a DUE mention can be added at the target. signed, Rosguill talk 15:17, 22 August 2022 (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.

De Gruyter Open (formerly Versita)

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. I deleted all non-article edit history and MWR'd the article history to De Gruyter Open (chosen because it's the base title). I then restored the redirect history already at De Gruyter Open so those edits were not lost. -- Tavix (talk) 17:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term. You'd search for either De Gruyter Open or Versita, not both together. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:51, 22 August 2022 (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.

Giant white shark

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 19:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any real useage of this term for "Megalodon" at all, and it seems like an implausible search term. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:39, 22 August 2022 (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.

Religious exemption (U.S.)

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 Religious exemption#United States. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By far the most common locus of discussion for religious exemptions is in the field of vaccine law, which Burwell does not concern. Religious exemption - even in the United States (perhaps more so than anywhere) - is a far broader title than can be restricted to any one U.S. Supreme Court case. BD2412 T 03:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: I was about to close this as "retarget", but I've noticed that the content you mention hasn't been added to the proposed target. Do you still agree on retargeting this redirect there? CycloneYoris talk! 23:23, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's still a better target than the case. I'll add the relevant content sometime in the next week or so. BD2412 T 00:34, 29 August 2022 (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.

Google Scholar and academic libraries

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 2#Google Scholar and academic libraries

Niggaracci

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 3#Niggaracci

Environmental Law (Law Review)

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! 23:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Error in the act of disambiguation. There's already Environmental Law (law review). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:35, 22 August 2022 (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.

Functional Ecology – journal

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. signed, Rosguill talk 19:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect way to dab things. We have Functional Ecology (journal) already. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Both redirects were the original locations of the article before a page move was performed. There could be several backlinks to it from the old revisions of linking articles. Deleting the redirect will break those links without much apparent benefit. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
    I checked (https://ahrefs.com/backlink-checker) and no such backlink exists anywhere on the internet. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Apparent divide between "undeserved error" deleters and WP:CHEAP keepers.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:35, 22 August 2022 (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.

Batman 5 through 8

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 07:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similar rationale as the Superman redirects listed below.

1. These movies are never called that.

2. These films are part of two completely separate universes, grouped together as though they were continuations of the original 1989-97 Batman film series.

3. Batman Begins isn't even the 5th Batman film as you also have Batman (1966 film), making these redirects completely incorrect.

MightyArms (talk) 00:33, 22 August 2022 (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.

Denim (color)

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 Thryduulf (talk) 12:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Nominating these redirects procedurally since Denim (color) had an RFD in 2018 and a AFD in 2011 (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denim (color)) that resulted in "delete". The target and/or embedded anchor these redirects target no longer exists; the subject is mentioned in the target article, but it does not seem to be the only plausible target. This color is also mentioned in a list at List of Crayola crayon colors#Standard colors (as mentioned in the previous RFD). In addition, Denim (color) is a ((R with history)) that hints it is a shade of a color and could be listed in one of those pages more accurately. Not sure an ultimate plan here, but it doesn't seem as though the current situation is really helpful for readers. Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:15, 22 August 2022 (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.

Debut issue

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Debut issue

Thank

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 Thanks. czar 16:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This longstanding (2005) redirect was recently retargeted by User:Tree Critter to wikt:thank and then again (after I reverted that retargeting during new page patrol) to B-cell activating factor, claiming that Gratitude doesn't actually mention the term. That may be, but it is nevertheless the common meaning and the page should still target there. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No it shouldn't, as it fails WP:R#DELETE. If Gratitude can't add anymore to the understanding of the word then it shouldn't be leading there. Tree Critter (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Unclear if this should be retargeted to Thanks or to Thank you... or should it be kept to target Gratitude?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As nominator I am fine with either Thanks or Thank you as targets, although I am somewhat surprised the forrmer has been a disambiguation page uncontroversially since 2008 and the latter exists as a separate article. (I would have expected both of those to be redirects to Gratitude). * Pppery * it has begun... 02:52, 22 August 2022 (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.
More