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 Non-binary gender#Xenogender. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Xenogender → wiktionary:xenogender  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This page is a soft redirect to wiktionary, a section (visible anchor) is now available in Non-binary gender#Xenogender. Should this be there or remain as a soft redirect? The addition to the page non-binary is new, it could be removed as it already were multiple times in the past (see Talk:Non-binary_gender/Archive_8#About_the_xenogender). Tazuco (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the suggested target mentions the term and is covered by citations.--Lenticel ^(talk) 02:17, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Non-binary gender#Xenogender per nom as plausible search term. Bonoahx (talk) 12:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 19:09, 7 March 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. There's no dispute here that this is a plausible redirect for the section in question. If that section winds up being removed from the article, it would be reasonable to renominate this. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 01:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Greenhouse gas emissions from streaming music → Streaming media#Greenhouse gas emissions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as negligible compared to anything else people do - such as eating - see for example Low-carbon diet Chidgk1 (talk) 17:23, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the nomination statement is completely irrelevant to whether a redirect should exist. The sourced target section that had (apparently uncontroversially) been in the article since August 2019 was removed from the article by the nominator without discussion, with an identical rationale, four minutes before the nomination here. Thryduulf (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep now the content has been restored. Thryduulf (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  For context here is the deleted section https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Streaming_media&diff=1075598893&oldid=1074993941. I also don’t believe that a section that at fave value appears to be decently sourced and has stood for over a year and and half should have been removed without discussion unless there was a very good reason (and no I don’t consider the nominators assertion that the impact is negligible to be one). I would recommend closing this, restoring the section, the nominator open a discussion to remove the section on the article talk page and, if a consensus to remove is formed to remove the relevant info then ask for the redirect to be deleted.--65.93.195.118 (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I see the reposed above mine to be contesting the removal so I readied the section. I reiterate that this should be closed since I see a discussion on the articles talk page as the first step if the nominator believes that that subject shouldn’t be covered.--65.93.195.118 (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a discussion but nobody has replied as yet. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment OK I doubt I will bother with the article which is about "media" but I think the redirect should be deleted as I understand "music" to mean just sound not video. As you know sound takes up minimal space and transmission capacity compared to video. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sound is a subset of media, and redirecting a narrow search term to a broader article is usually unproblematic, especially when, as here, that article includes directly relevant content. Thryduulf (talk) 22:22, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cabbages are a subset of agriculture but we don't have a redirect called "greenhouse gas emissions from cabbages" to Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, because their emissions are negligible. Chidgk1 (talk) 05:48, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      No, we don't have that redirect because there is no content about the search term at the target. Whether the emissions from cabbages are negligible or not is completely irrelevant to the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 02:10, 11 March 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 Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In#Memorable moments. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Sock it to me? → Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is this phrase, with its question mark, properly targeted, or should it be deleted to lead the searcher to disambiguation page Sock It To Me? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Refine to Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In#Memorable moments, which explains the quote. It's from Richard Nixon's appearance on the show. None of the items on the disambiguation page are questions. - Eureka Lott 15:14, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. This is one of those cases where Google is actively unhelpful - even when placed in quotes and selecting "verbatim" results only, it still refuses to distinguish uses with a question mark from those without. Thryduulf (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In#Memorable moments. I ask that, like Chesterton's fence, we not seek to make changes where none are necessary. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the second sentence. Your !vote is for a refinement, so you are saying that a change should be made. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: While the current redirect is fine, the comments here evince ignorance of Nixon's question on Laugh In so refining helps make this more clear, although anyone who reads English could have read the article to understand the redirect. Chris Troutman (talk) 20:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? I don't see any ignorance of Nixon nor misunderstanding of the redirect here. This is a straightforward (albeit flawed) WP:PRIMARYTOPIC question. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Refine per Eureka Lott. SNSL, if you want searchers of this term to go to the disambiguation page, the solution would be to retarget it to the disambiguation, not deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to disambiguation page. I'm not convinced the Laugh-In reference would be the primary topic here. A quick Google search yields results mainly pertaining to the clothing company or the various songs mentioned there. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:25, 6 March 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Secret Poison → A Million Voices (song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to have potentially been a working title, although I can't find any reference to it as such on Wikipedia. If there is a better target for this then retargeting could work, otherwise I suggest deletion Sims2aholic8 (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not mentioned at target. 114.125.94.129 (talk) 13:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom. Appears to be a working title and/or placeholder name. Not mentioned in target article. Grk1011 (talk) 13:38, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nominator. Implausible redirect. AKK700 16:20, 11 March 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 List of McDonald's marketing campaigns. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:48, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• 我就喜歡 → McDonald's advertising  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be implausible redirect per WP:RLOTE. Vitaium (talk) 08:01, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per RLOTE. 114.125.94.129 (talk) 13:54, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of McDonald's marketing campaigns where this slogan is mentioned. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:15, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of McDonald's marketing campaigns per anon. It could use a reference though --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:05, 7 March 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 Slovene language. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Slovenian Slovene language → Slovenian language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

R3 - it is a double redirect and doubles two alternative names for the same page. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 04:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strike my R3 comment and {Endorse} retarget per Mx. Granger Happy Editing--IAmChaos 08:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to avoid the double redirect. This seems like a plausible search term for a reader who is trying to specify the Slovene language as spoken in Slovenia (as opposed to Austria or Italy). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:52, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

•  Note: as nom - changed my proposal post relisting; just wanted to make clear it was after, so i'm posting this below the relist boxHappy Editing--IAmChaos 08:13, 6 March 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. Jay (talk) 05:14, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Congean → Otitis media  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Can't find anything conclusive in searches; possibly means the target in Malay or Indonesian (cf wikt:congek). WP:RLOTE applies. eviolite (talk) 04:37, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per RLOTE. That's a slang in Indonesian. 114.125.94.129 (talk) 13:59, 6 March 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. Jay (talk) 05:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Second War of Ukrainian Independence → 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was tagged for speedy deletion CSD R3 but I thought it was better to discuss whether this redirect is appropriate than judge it as a "misnomer". Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's unclear to me whether I can withdraw this nomination with a Speedy Delete since I'm the nominator. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:04, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – No evidence reliable sources use this name, or that anyone could possibly think to type this in to get to our article on the 2022 invasion. By the way, I nominated it for CSD R3 on the premise that this redirect is 'implausible', as for whether it is a misnomer or not, I cannot say... RGloucester — ☎ 04:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is invalid as a descriptive title (a defense from invasion is not a war of independence) and enjoys no widespread usage, in reliable sources or otherwise—just this Reddit comment, in a thread where it wasn't even the top answer. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 04:33, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Agree with the above. Slatersteven (talk) 10:56, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete While I understand this redirect was meant in good faith, it's not a common term. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per reasons above. This name is not used in any RS. P1221 (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not mentioned at the target. Plus, haven't seen any RS use this term. ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 19:19, 7 March 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 Fuck. Redirected back to its initial target, since there wasn't enough support for a DAB page. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:49, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Go fuck yourself → Russian warship, go fuck yourself!  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are several other existing redirects that involve the phrase "Go fuck yourself" or a derivative thereof. These include Go Fuck Yourself (song), Go fuck yourself, San Diego!, and Go fsck yourself. I'm not really sure that the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for Go fuck yourself is Russian warship, go fuck yourself!, and the page Fuck contains several examples of the well-known use of the term "Go fuck yourself". It seems likely to me that Fuck would be the best place to redirect this to, so I propose that we redirect to Fuck. — Mhawk10 (talk) 01:02, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I support a redirect to Fuck as the creator of the target page Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 01:32, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong support either the proposed redirect to Fuck or creation of a disambig. The idea that this redirect to RWGFY is being used to support the phrase's ubiquity to not merge it, when "go fuck yourself" is a common turn of phrase decades preceding it is ludicrous and let's quickly stop it. Kingsif (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Setindexify/disambiguate -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:18, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• From 2007 until now, this was a redirect to the article on Fuck, which includes a couple examples of people using the phrase. Revert to the previous state, and add a Russian warship mention to the article on Fuck, if desired. - Eureka Lott 07:33, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• This could've been boldly reverted instead of taken to RFD because it is a very common swearing phrase. So yeah, revert and retarget to fuck. 114.125.94.129 (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert back to fuck I was a moron back in 2007 and made a lot of pointless redirects. This is one of the few redirects I made back then that was actually worth it. Does anyone searching for this honestly care about this Russian crap? Hell I have never even heard of it and I'm sure most people searching for go fuck yourself never have either. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 14:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. Although I must comment what a naughty redirect :) Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 14:53, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh if you think that's naughty you haven't seen my videos. I use the F and C word in my videos constantly. At the top of that I use a lot of dark humor. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert as redirect to Fuck P1221 (talk) 20:22, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revert back to Fuck, largely per OP and Blaze (hello!). -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 00:44, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retargetto Fuck (1st preference) or Disambiguate (2nd preference). ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 19:21, 7 March 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 Boredom. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Enui → Ennui (sonnet)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Due to some double-redirects, this has ended up redirecting to Ennui (sonnet), which as far as I can tell is never spelled with one n. This seems to be a common-enough misspelling to have a significant number of pageviews, so suggest Retarget to Boredom, which ennui redirects to. eviolite (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• REtarget as a ((R from typo|ennui)) / ((R from avoided double redirect|ennui)) per nom -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget as plausible typo for ennui --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:06, 7 March 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 00:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:RDELETE (10): This could be expanded into an article using Rees's Cyclopædia. The target article contains no information on the subject of Aerostation. The term is obsolete (wiktionary), it can have multiple meanings, and the subject appears obscure. No article is likely forthcoming. Paleorthid (talk) 00:04, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 15:14, 12 March 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.