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 00:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Your contract has expired → A Hat in Time  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Song is not mentioned at the target; not helpful for the reader. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless someone wishes to make a song/soundtrack list. wizzito | say hello! 22:03, 9 February 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.

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 00:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Assaded → Bashar al-Assad  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Neologism/meme not explained at the target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Non-notable meme which has no mention anywhere in the encyclopaedia. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:16, 10 February 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.

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 00:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Lucchey Laffange → List of Bollywood films of 2016  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Mmirsa → List of Bollywood films of 2016  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both. The first film seems to have no mention anywhere, the second is listed in the filmography sections of three articles, none of which would form a suitable target in my opinion. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:19, 10 February 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.

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 00:18, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• British invasion → British Invasion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous when uncapitalised, can just as commonly refer to British military invasions. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• As someone who has only a passing familiarity with British military history and 20th century music, it's not obvious to me that capitalization is more appropriate for one of those than the other. I suspect many of our readers will feel the same way, so I think British Invasion and British invasion should point to the same place. Therefore keep, but feel free to start a move request at Talk:British Invasion if you think it's not the primary topic for this phrase. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 19:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep without prejudice to an RM per Mx. Granger. Consider also a hatnote to List of wars involving the United Kingdom. Thryduulf (talk) 20:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Mx. Granger. We already have British invasions pointing to a dab page for those who are looking for other cultural or military uses. Havradim leaf a message 12:03, 13 February 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.

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 delete per WP:CSD#G5. (non-admin closure) Mdewman6 (talk) 20:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Marquesote → Sponge cake  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, esWiki has separate articles for Marquesote and Sponge cake. Deletion to encourage article creation seems the way to go here. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:33, 9 February 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.

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 delete per WP:CSD#G5. (non-admin closure) Mdewman6 (talk) 20:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Ugandan Canadians → Black Canadians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Tanzanian Canadians → Black Canadians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Burundian Canadians → Black Canadians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kenyan Canadians → Black Canadians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Rwandan Canadians → Black Canadians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of Uganda, Tanzania, Burundi, Kenya or Rwanda at the target, delete unless duly sourced content can be added. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 18:05, 9 February 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.

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 13:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:DOGBITESMAN → Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Routine coverage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think someone would type this in to get to the redirect target. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 13:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment isn't the phrase Man bites dog? If it's a common term in journalism I could see it being used as a redirect by people familiar with that field, but surely it would be WP:MANBITESDOG unless if I've misunderstood some in-joke. --Bonoahx (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  ...Which it appears to also be. In that case maybe Delete this redirect and Keep WP:MANBITESDOG. --Bonoahx (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m pretty sure the joke is routine coverage is the opposite of the unusual events covered in Man bites dog articles therefore it would be like the more common occurrence of dogs biting people. I’m not sure if we should keep thjsnbut I disagree with the suggestion that the redirect should be at would be WP:MANBITESDOG.--65.93.195.118 (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, in that case I'll retract the vote. Explanation make sense. --Bonoahx (talk) 14:06, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Reasonably intuitive shortcut, 12 years old and approx. 100 backlinks. The idea is that "Dog bites man" type stories are the exact kind of routine events that generate coverage in the local news but should not have an article. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 01:49, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is a perfectly reasonable (one might say cromulent) link, the typical "this expresses what the link explains" sort of thing often used in discussions. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 09:47, 10 February 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.

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 Restore and AfD. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• General Motors 50th Anniversary Show → General Motors  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was originally an article, redirected in Feb 2013 by Chriq with an edit summary implying a merge took place with General Motors though looking in the edit history from around then I can's see any sign of this. Not mentioned at target now in any case and I think it very unlikely that any is justified. Delete unless others feel it is worth restoring the article and presumably sending to AFD. A7V2 (talk) 02:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore and AfD. This seems like a potentially notable subject and, if it isn't, I'd like to hear AfD say that conclusively. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 06:56, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore and AfD per Tamzin. Definitely was a WP:BLAR rather than a merge based on the edit history. AfD is the proper place for to decide what to do here. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - No arguments from me if this is restored and taken to AFD. A7V2 (talk) 08:13, 14 February 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.

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 Angle. Jay (talk) 06:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Theta angle → Vacuum angle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Use of theta to refer to an angle occurs in so many contexts, the current target seems far too specific. I suggest this be retargeted, but am unsure what would be the best target. Note that this is the result of a very old move from 2005. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I guess this should be simply retargeted to Angle where theta is used unless anyone has a better idea. It should be kept due to being from a move, and Angle is where Theta (disambiguation) directs users seeking its use with respect to angles. Angle theta does not currently exist. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:41, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Angle as the most general target. θ and φ are the standard symbols for angles in a [[spherical coordinate system, but as OP says that's just one example of the use of θ as symbol for an angle. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 16:16, 15 February 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.

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 an unopposed deletion nomination (after a relist too). Jay (talk) 06:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Scuderia Sant'Ambroeus → List of Formula One constructors  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to only serve the purpose of being a misleading bluelink, eg it's the only bluelink on List of Formula One constructors#Privateer teams to redirect back to the same article, and also appears in Scuderia and a hatnote at Scuderia Ambrosiana amongst other places. Readers aren't served by being taken to the list article which contains next to no information about the team, and if notable a redlink would encourage article creation, so I think delete. A7V2 (talk) 06:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:06, 9 February 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.

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 22:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Rhyolite Park → Chiricahua National Monument  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While there is some evidence this was once a name for an area in what is now the national monument (see 1), it does not seem to be a name in current use. The only mention on WP is in a reference in the article, which is currently a dead link. The NPS site does not use this term to refer to anything, and a google search primarily comes up with Rhyolite Regional Park in Colorado (not on WP either). More broadly, as a search term, there are lots of parks that feature Rhyolite. I recommend deletion to avoid confusion. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC).[reply]

• Comment I searched up Rhyolite Park, and the only thing that it mentions is a children's playground and a park called Rhyolite Regional Park in Castle Rock, Colorado. I am saying comment because I am not sure if it should be deleted. Wait, should it be? StaleGuy22 (talk) 20:45, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The link provided by nom does show this was the name in 1926, and probably that needs to get into an article somewhere. In any case, the term will be ambiguous because of other parks with the same name that have come up since then. Delete for now to avoid confusion. Jay (talk) 06:21, 16 February 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.

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 01:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Winter Storm Delphine → 2021–22 North American winter  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should be deleted as section of the storm on the page was deleted for apparently not being notable enough. . 69.118.232.58 (talk)— Preceding undated comment added 21:39, 31 January 2022

• Retarget to 1969–70 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season#Tropical Storm Delphine which was a winter storm. Jay (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Jay: That target is a tropical storm, and it took place in the southern hemisphere summer. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • oops.. did not know it was in the southern hemisphere. Delete. Jay (talk) 02:54, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:58, 9 February 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.

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. Wrong venue. Nom has filed at WP:RM/TR. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 08:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Theta vacuum → Vacuum angle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'm proposing deleting this redirect so as to be able to then rename the article as "Theta vacuum" since that is the main relevant topic. "Vacuum angle" is a much less common name for what is being described as it is merely the parameter that indexes the various theta vacua. Most common textbooks and papers usually refer to the theta vacuum rather than vacuum angle as well. OpenScience709 (talk) 00:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wrong venue If you are wanting to rename the page vacuum angle to theta vacuum, then you need to start a requested move discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like vaccuum angle was boldly moved by the nom to theta vaccuum over the redirect, then immediately moved back by the same user for some reason. It can't be moved again due to the extra history at the redirect now that it has been listed here. Again, I think bringing to RM is appropriate at this point if a move is the objective. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:50, 9 February 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.