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. Discussion appears to have died down following a series of keep !votes, with no clear front runner or obvious policy basis to extract a consensus from the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Helena (empress) → Helena, mother of Constantine I  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Empress Helena → Helena, mother of Constantine I  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Several empresses have been named Helena, including Helena (wife of Julian), Helena (daughter of Alypius), Helena (wife of Crispus) and Helena of Bulgaria, Empress of Serbia to name a few. ★Trekker (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Helena (name), which lists these. BD2412 T 23:12, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I presume BD is referring to Helena (given name), but I've taken the liberty of redirecting Helena (name) to there as it make sense. TartarTorte 23:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @TartarTorte: As there is no Helena (surname), I see no reason why the given name wouldn't just be at Helena (name) at all. BD2412 T 07:06, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @BD2412 Yeah, I probably should have just moved it instead of redirecting name to given name. At this point, it probably makes sense to wait until RfD is finished, but my bad. TartarTorte 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Helena (given name): Per BD2412 TartarTorte 23:20, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Whichever way this goes, Empress Helena should be added to this (it currently redirects to the same article as Helena (empress), unsurprisingly) – QueenofBithynia (talk) 23:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Got it. Adding it here. I hope that helps. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 00:01, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks! FWIW I marginally support retargeting to Helena (given name). QueenofBithynia (talk) 00:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet of AFreshStart)[reply]

• Set indexify as nobody listed at Helena (given name) is described as being an empress so that wont actually help anybody using this search term find the person they are looking for (Helena, mother of Constantine I is described as the mother of an emperor, Helena (wife of Julian) the daughter of an emperor and Helena (niece of Justin II) the niece of an empress, but that's the closest anybody gets). Alternatively the given name could be fixed, but mentioning every title or role everybody had that could be used to search for them is likely out of scope. Thryduulf (talk) 10:01, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Don't retarget. The mother of Constantine is by far the most likely search target, with an average of nearly 400 daily page views over the last ninety days. This is nine or ten times the amount of traffic received by Julian's ephemeral consort, while the daughter of Alypius receives an average of 3. The wife of Crispus is a redirect to Crispus, in which she is barely mentioned, and even he receives only a quarter as many page views as his grandmother. The late medieval Serbian "empress" receives a daily average of 19 page views. In other words, we have one fairly well-known figure receiving six to eight times the traffic of several pretty obscure ones combined. The redirects seem to be doing their job; a hatnote should be sufficient to bring people to a disambiguation page. P Aculeius (talk) 13:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Helena was by far better known as Constantine's mother and a saint, not as an empress, her marriage with Constantius is even disputed.★Trekker (talk) 13:46, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a question of whether it's the best title or even whether it's technically correct—she's still known by it, and readers might be expected to search for her under it; it's far less probable that people searching for an "Empress Helena" are looking for the almost unknown wife of Julian for a few months after he was proclaimed emperor, or the even more obscure daughter of Alypius, whose article barely gets any page views at all, or the still more obscure wife of Crispus, who's briefly mentioned in the article about her husband, or a medieval Serbian queen who's hardly known to English speakers under any title. None of the alternative targets are particularly likely search targets, which is why these redirects are best left as they are. P Aculeius (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. I think Julian's wife/Constantine's daughter is just as likely of a person to expect and search for with that term. And again, these ladies are only a couple of the empresses, Roman or otherwise who were named Helena.★Trekker (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. St Helena is by far the best known individual mentioned here; the rest are known merely as empresses, but she's known for her religious significance, and known by people generally unfamiliar with the history of the period. Look at hits: in the last 20 days, St Helena was viewed 7,719 times, while the other four empresses were viewed 1359 times combined. In one day, St Helena got 482 hits — more than half of what Mrs Julian got in the whole time period (863), and almost as much as all three of the others in the whole time period combined (496). I can see reason for an exception if a strong naming convention is relevant, but clearly that's not the case here. 175.39.61.121 (talk) 05:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't a discussion to delete Helena's article, and no one is arguing she isn't more famous than the other women. But she isn't more famous as "empress". As I said above, we don't even know is she was actually married to Constantius, 99% of everything important about her happened after she was divorced by the man. She was named Augusta (not the same thing as empress I must add) long after her husband the emperor was dead and rose to prominence during her son's reign.★Trekker (talk) 22:30, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The point above about her being the most likely target is borne out also by the "what links here" of each of the redirects - they are all pointing to Constantine's mum. Furius (talk) 11:57, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:56, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the incoming links mentioned above, that's almost certainly because the article itself was at Helena (empress) until it was moved to the current title on 03:18, 21 November 2020‎, so the incoming links are not good evidence that Helena, mother of Constantine I is the most likely target. – Scyrme (talk) 20:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the discussion that led to that is at Talk:Helena, mother of Constantine I#Requested move 25 October 2020; it decided that "mother of Constantine" was the more common English usage. I copy over from there a number of sources were cited referring to her as "Empress Helena" without further qualification, which tends to support the idea that the redirect should stay where it is:

• Cyril Mango. "The Empress Helena, Helenopolis, Pylae.", Travaux et Mémoires: 'empress'.
• Oxford Dictionary of Late Antiquity: Helena introduced as 'empress'.
• Helena Augusta (Brill, 1992): standard biography of Helena
• Encyclopedia Britannica: both Empress and mother of Constantine used

A search in google books for "Empress Helena" finds numerous references to her without qualification [1] . Note that a number of broad historical works are able to refer to her by this name without further qualification:

• A History of the Church in 100 Objects
• Women rulers throughout the ages
• History of the Coptic Orthodox Church

Furius (talk) 12:26, 31 October 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 Settlement movement#United Kingdom. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• British Association of Settlements and Social Action Centres → Development trust  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The British Association of Settlements and Social Action Centres is now called Locality, but doesn't have a Wikipedia page. It probably isn't notable, I don't know for certain if it had one which was deleted or never existed. There are wl from several related pages, which now redirect to Development trust which mentions two organisations which combined to create Locality. But this is only in the context of an association of Development trusts. Which is a circular and I can't really see that someone wanting to find out about the former British Association of Settlements and Social Action Centres is going to see the relevance of a page which describes a type of legal organisational structure in the UK. I haven't really explained this well, but in essence the target page really has very little relation to the redirect because neither of the former or current organisations it could link to are notable. JMWt (talk) 16:12, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Settlement movement#United Kingdom. Jay 💬 08:45, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 17:46, 30 October 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. Jay 💬 18:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Winama Naberrie → List of Star Wars characters#N  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Incredibly obscure Star Wars character not listed anywhere on the encyclopedia. Padmé's grandmother, never appears on-screen. Delete. TNstingray (talk) 17:03, 30 October 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 withdrawn. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 09:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Viserys II Targaryen → The Princess and the Queen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target article. Mentioned in passing at List of monarchs of fictional countries, but without any substance, and to be honest I'm skeptical of that list's encyclopedicness to begin with. Suggest deletion unless a better target can be found. (See also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 22 § Viserys Targaryen, courtesy pings @Mellohi! and Jay.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 08:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I had checked for all three Viserys before suggesting the dab at the other RfD. I assumed the lost prince, Viserys Targaryen at the target was Viserys II. Was Viserys I lost? Jay 💬 09:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I haven't read the book, but you appear to be right. Withdrawn. :) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 09:19, 30 October 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 05:14, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I've (South Korean group) → Ive (group)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Incorrect name and unrelated to topic, neither was it mentioned on target. Official sources and secondary reliable sources never uses "I've" either hence I'm not sure why this redirect was even created in the first place. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 05:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as the group's name is derived from the contraction in the first place, making the contraction a possible search term for those who forgot the proper stylisation. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Mellohi!. A7V2 (talk) 02:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: WP:CHEAP solution to what seems pretty easy to type in by mistake. - 2pou (talk) 00:47, 4 November 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. The delete arguments were convincing, specifically on the point that the linked sources use a lowercase "republic", rather than the uppercase "Republic" in question. Legoktm (talk) 07:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Titanic Republic → San Marino  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While the highest peak of San Marino is Monte Titano I can find no evidence at all that the country (or indeed anything else) is ever referred to as the "Titanic Republic". Thryduulf (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete All search engine mentions of "Titanic Republic" are on pages unrelated to San Marino. 2601:647:5800:4D2:6D83:51CA:4F67:548 (talk) 16:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as an implausible name. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per this. It uses the term six times. Redirects are cheap. Srnec (talk) 19:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Use in one work does not equal a useful redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 21:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I can find no evidence at all! Evidence provided. This changes nothing! Why do I bother? Srnec (talk) 01:56, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Does that source say “Titanic Republic” or instead “Titanic republic”, or both? Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom et al. Confusing and misleading search term. CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  How can a search term, chosen by readers, be "confusing and misleading"? Srnec (talk) 01:56, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not widely known and that is why it's confusing for the casual reader. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Srnec, who has provided evidence of use, and I see no competing usage. To resolve the "confusing" claim, I recommend adding an explanation to the target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Evidence of usage has been discovered.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the evidence of use, I share the concern that this is only 1 work; plausibly, use in a single work might only demonstrate a patch of purple by a single author. However, I also searched repubblica+titanica and found another, Italian-language source using the equivalent phrase. The Italian-language source predates the English-language source linked by Srnec by a number of decades, although both are from the 1800s. This suggests the expression has been used more widely, at least in older, pre-digital literature. – Scyrme (talk) 16:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Anythingyouwant: It appears to use only Titanic republic, not Titanic Republic. – Scyrme (talk) 16:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Cyclone - confusing, misleading, especially the uppercased Republic. And let the content at San Marino decide if this redirect is valid. Jay 💬 18:09, 6 November 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 05:11, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Freemerican victernity made in china → The Colbert Report  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure. Probably sounds offensive? Well it's been here since 2007-04-26. A long time. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 04:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Question Was the phrase used in the show? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:44, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The phrase was used in the show; however, it was used in one episode and had essentially no staying power. As it is not mentioned at the article or on wikiquote, there seems to be no proper place to target it. TartarTorte 12:36, 31 October 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 05:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Means "Aachen" in Polish. Delete for the lack of historical connections between Aachen and Poland. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:44, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It's mentioned in the article. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I might be wrong on this, but the city appears to have a significant Polish population. Over a thousand strong. Enough that they're one of the top five groups in terms of the population of foreign nationals. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 30#Cáchy.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Clyde!_Franklin! 02:54, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Large Polish population (as in the rest of the NRW state, where Polish people are the second-largest minority and have been since the 19th century, although admittedly mostly further south). Furius (talk) 12:38, 31 October 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 05:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Czech name for the city. No historical affinity between Czech and this city. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It's mentioned in the article. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:20, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure that table is at all encyclopedically relevant. Tempted to remove it as WP:SYNTH. Note that there's other RLOTEs here too. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 21:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per Tamzin's comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Clyde!_Franklin! 02:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: As part of the Holy Roman Empire, Bohemia had a noteworthy historical link to Aachen. Furius (talk) 12:41, 31 October 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 Talia (given name). ✗plicit 05:13, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Tallia → Ian Irvine#Three Worlds Cycle series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Another split-off from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 19#Three Worlds cycle plot points that is not mentioned at the target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Talia (given name) as a minor spelling variation of it. There is an entertainer named Tallia Storm, and there's another lady with this spelling. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to Talia (given name) per Mellohi! I couldn't find anything with it in the title, but it is mentioned in some articles as an alternative spelling of "Talia." Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 15:06, 30 October 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 05:14, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Maelys → Ian Irvine#Three Worlds Cycle series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Another split-off from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 19#Three Worlds cycle plot points that is not mentioned at the target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• There is a cosmetics company called Maelys and an ASOIAF character called Maelys. Neither look notable. Leaning delete until these two other things get mentioned anywhere. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:52, 30 October 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 05:12, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Sunrise Elementary School → Central Valley School District  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was created 14 years ago when a one-line stub on a NN school was redirected. However, there are over 40 schools by this name mentioned in articles and this one is in particular is no more notable than the rest, certainly not worthy of being a PT. Unless some wants to make a long SIA listing all of them, this should be deleted. MB 02:25, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as hopelessly vague and untargetable. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:53, 30 October 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 Poultice. Legoktm (talk) 07:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. I looked through third party search results to see if this was a word in a foreign language, but most results were either for Poultice or the Greek word for "pulp". Steel1943 (talk) 08:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 09:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; it seems to be the Ancient Greek word for 'porridge' or 'pulse' ((Latin "puls", from Greek "πόλτος" - poltos, "porridge"), which is a synonym for legume. However WP:RFFL suggests that it should be deleted. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Poultice which has a mention. It would be an appropriate use per WP:RFFL as explaining the Greek origin of the word poultice. Jay 💬 09:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:25, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Jay

Roostery123 (talk) 13:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:54, 30 October 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 Student exchange program. There were multiples votes which provided both retarget and delete options, but the retarget was an equal or first choice. Jay 💬 17:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Visiting student → Tata Institute of Fundamental Research#Visiting Students Research Programme  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This is a very broader concept and belongs basically to all the major universities, not only to the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research. Horcrux (talk) 17:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Much too broad a search term to target at any one institution. Thryduulf (talk) 18:11, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - the existing target is the section Tata Institute of Fundamental Research#Visiting Students Research Programme (I have changed this above). Note there is also Visiting Students Research Programme and Visiting Students Research Program which target the same section and are perhaps similarly too broad, though the fact they share the exact name with the specific program means I don't think they are suitable to add to this listing. A7V2 (talk) 23:18, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete per nom and Thryduulf. I say weak as perhaps Visiting scholar or Student exchange program could be suitable targets? I'm not sure. A7V2 (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as extremely broad term, not exclusively related to TIFR, or, Retarget to Student exchange program per A7V2 (equal preference). —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 13:33, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to student exchange program as ((R from related word)), second choice delete as too broad a search term to defer to search results. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to student exchange program, seems to be the closest synonym. I'm fine with deletion too but as a second choice. --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:41, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to student exchange program per reasons described above. Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:42, 5 November 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.