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 06:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Amdexyn → Multivitamin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Oralovite → Multivitamin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Vitaped → Multivitamin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These are names of multivitamine supplements that seem to be not notable on their own and are not mentioned at the target. While Vitaped is mentioned in List of drugs: Vf–Vz, it is in a list with no description on what it does. Oralovite and Amdexyn have no mentions at all on wikipedia. It seems these would be best deleted. TartarTorte 17:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Multivitamin article does not need to be a directory of every multivitamin formulation and trade name, but on the other hand, it serves a purpose to be able to look up individual trade names to see that they are multivitamins. Each redirect takes minimal space, and reduces the risk that anyone will start them as new separate articles. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Redirects without mentions are only rarely useful as they don't provide any additional information to those who know what they are and are likely to confuse those who don't. If these aren't notable enough to even be included in a list that gives information about what they are then we do not have any information about them and should mislead people (including users of third-party search engines) into thinking we do. Thryduulf (talk) 12:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the above. We don't need redirects on every medicine in the world, only the ones where the readers can find some information. Jay 💬 06:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 2023 as an unopposed deletion nomination. Although 2024 was bundled here, it was not tagged for the RfD, and the redirect has been turned into an article. Jay 💬 06:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Fighter (2023 film) → Hrithik Roshan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fighter (2024 film) → Hrithik Roshan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is from an upcoming 2024 film to an actor in the film (Hrithik Roshan), where there is only one mention of the film, buried deep in the body of that article. I think this redirect should be deleted and an article can be drafted in Draft: space. But if the redirect is to be retained, then consider redirecting to the director, Siddharth Anand, (where it appears in the filmography table) or the studio producing it, Viacom18 Studios, (although there is no mention of the film in that article). The film was originally to be release in January 2023, then September 2023, and now is planned to be released in January 2024, so even the title of this redirect is incorrect. — Archer1234 (t·c) 20:13, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The creator of this redirect has already created Fighter (2024 film), which is a redirect to the same target.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 07:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Archer1234 Now someone has expanded the article. SuperSharanya (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Fighter (2024 film) has been converted into a full-fledged article. The redirect Fighter (2023 film) is not necessary.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 17:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 06:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Governorate of the the Río de la Plata and of Paraguay → Governorate of the Río de la Plata  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Endorsements for the the 2022 Conservative Party leadership election (UK) → 2022 Conservative Party leadership election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• History of the the Jews in San Francisco → History of the Jews in San Francisco  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Stone sculptures of horses and sheep in the the Caucasian States → Stone sculptures of horses and sheep in the Caucasian States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirects that contain the doubled word "the" in their names seemingly in error, likely making it an implausible search term. The former two were always redirects, the latter two are ((R from move))s. However, neither spent a significant enough time as the article title for WP:RFD#K4 to be an issue: the first one spent ~an hour as the page title while the last one spent less than 30 seconds as the article title. Randi Moth (talk) 19:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom - the sheep etc were me. Johnbod (talk) 19:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I created the first redirect. I don't particularly mind if any get deleted, and it would appears that there's reason for them to be. I dream of horses ^{(Contribs) (Talk)} 20:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - implausible search terms. I went ahead and deleted the sheep and horses one per G7. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom as housekeeping. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 19:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Alu Kurumba language (redirect) → Alu Kurumba language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible search term, "redirect" has no connection to the language. From the page history this seems to be a remnant of a round robin page move? 192.76.8.84 (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly that. No discussion needed: there are no incoming article links. — kwami (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 target both to Prime Minister of Canada. Having these as redirects was seen as preferable to deletion. No prejudice against turning it into an article on the misconception of the office of President of Canada, the proposals to create such an office, republicanism in Canada, etc. There was a late suggestion to target Republic of Canada which did not get further support. Jay 💬 07:45, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• President of Canada → Prime Minister of Canada  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• President of canada → Governor General of Canada  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Canada does not have, and has never had, a president, nor an equivalent position in the executive. A set index masquerading as a disambiguation page listing only entries that don't fit the description was deleted at AFD a few months ago and the title was left to redirect to the current target, which is incorrect. It has also been a redirect to Governor General of Canada (also wrong), Monarchy of Canada (very wrong), and Republicanism in Canada (less wrong) in the past. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Republicanism in Canada, the only article out of the series which discusses the concept of a Canadian presidency. Coincidentally it also lists the only two people who have actually held the title of President in a functioning legislative body in what is now Canada, John Bruce and Louis Riel, both presidents of the provisional Red River Colony government (the Legislative Assembly of Assiniboia) which joined Confederation as the province of Manitoba about six months after forming. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:56, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note - added the lowercase redirect. They should at least target the same thing. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The only position it can be equated to (i.e. Head of state), is the Canadian monarch. GoodDay (talk) 21:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — No equivalent office. — Kawnhr (talk) 21:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Prime Minister of Canada per the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/President of Canada (contra the nom here, the consensus was to redirect not delete). This is an extremely plausible search term - Sahaib commented in the AfD that it was getting 84 views a day in September, and even as a less-visible redirect it's still getting an average of 1 use per day. Yes it's wrong, but the people using this almost certainly don't know that, those arriving at the article about the PM will be educated (Wikipedia's primary goal), a redlink doesn't help anybody and search results are unpredictable, sometimes multiple clicks/taps away and even if they do find something relevant there is no guarantee that the searcher will read them and learn anything. Thryduulf (talk) 22:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget the second to Prime Minister of Canada. The consensus at the AfD was to target the first in this manner, and I see no reason why a different logic would apply to the second. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Prime Minister of Canada much like Prime Minister of the United States redirects to President of the United States. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm very uncomfortable with the idea of a redirect to a non-existent office. Wikipedia is about getting it right. We shouldn't be referring to offices that have never existed. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No, Wikipedia is not about "getting it right", Wikipedia is about providing knowledge so that readers are educated about whatever it is they are looking up. In instances like this we do that best by taking readers the article that best explains what they searched isn't right but rather something similar is, which in this instance is Prime Minister of Canada. Thryduulf (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Stubbify up an article on the misconception of the office of President of Canada, who has espoused such, and the proposals to create such an office, republicanism in Canada; also cover the potential equivalents of such an office (GG, monarch of Canada, PM) that exist -- 65.92.244.151 (talk) 02:56, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I'm against deletion for the record; as for whether to target a specific office or a general concept article, I prefer Republicanism in Canada (the general concept with history of the proposed position) with a hatnote directing to the various offices that could be considered equivalent to a president: the monarch, the GG, and the PM. Also, many Westminster republics have a president and a prime minister, as many former Commonwealth realms simply swapped out the monarch/viceregal for a president, so it's a reasonable guess that someone searching for this is trying to find out who the actual President of Canada is, rather than just mistaken about the head of state or head of government's title. Overall, we can debate over which incorrect office to redirect to (though to be fair the PM is the most likely choice), but choosing any specific office is going to be wrong, and also does not provide the reader with as relevant information as could be provided in the republicanism article. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Also, fwiw, William Lyon Mackenzie was briefly President of Canada, in the short-lived Republic of Canada that attempted to break away from British rule during the Upper Canada rebellions. I don't think he makes a good redirect target, though. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder, if it would be possible to (if not delete or redirect) expand 'President of Canada' into an article. I think we do have other such pages on offices that didn't have full recognition, like President of the Confederate States. -- GoodDay (talk) 22:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The way this discussion is going, it seems that explanation is going to end up being a long and awkward hatnote at the Prime Minister of Canada article. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Prime Minister of Canada for reasons stated above. Many people from other countries may just be looking for the leader of the country and search president. No need to worry about theoretical cases of republicanism when that common search would be coming up every day.

Dan Carkner (talk) 23:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both to Prime Minister of Canada. It is much more likely that the head of government is what is wanted. Johnbod (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both as nonexistent concept, or (second choice) redirect to Republicanism in Canada. Do not redirect to either the head of state (a very plausible target) or the head of government (another plausible target) without a big fat stupid hatnote. Third choice: stub/pseudo-disambiguation page on the misconception that there is a president of Canada. —Kusma (talk) 16:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm personally in favour of deletion, as it's a nonexistent position (unless we're just opening the gates to all conceptual opposing terms) (post: after some time, I'm actually can see the reason for a redirect to PM). That said, might people consider retargeting this article to the Republic of Canada, seeing as how that is the only place where such a position actually existed. Leventio (talk) 22:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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. By Maile66 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) (non-admin closure). Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Timeline of of children's television on the BBC → Timeline of children's television on the BBC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible, page move leftover which was the article title for less than a day. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete: As it was created in error. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 18:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Supreme Council of of Georgia → Supreme Council of the Republic of Georgia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible, page move leftover which was the article title for just over 20 minutes. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:25, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete: As it was created in error. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:53, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - clearly incorrect and no evident incoming links, but not recently created (was created in 2021) or I would have just deleted it myself. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete delete per nom, housekeeping typo. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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. Original creator supported deletion. (non-admin closure) EpicPupper (talk) 22:32, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Murder of of Daunte Wright → Killing of Daunte Wright  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible; see Murder of Daunte Wright. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I apparently made an error when creating this! Please do delete it. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:37, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete: As it was created in error. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 18:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Possible violation of BLP as the police officer responsible for Wright's death was charged and convicted of manslaughter, not murder. Minnemeeples (talk) 21:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 19:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Cheese and Onion → Potato_chip#Flavored_chips  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Cheese & onion → Potato_chip#Flavored_chips  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The section with content about this flavour combination has been renmaed "Flavoring" (it exclusively uses the ampesand spelling) but search results show similar levels of content in multiple other articles, and also that crisps are not the only food using cheese and onion (e.g. Cheese and onion pie) so I'm not certain this is the best target. Thryduulf (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete spring onion and cheese sauce is a common topping for baked potatoes -- 65.92.244.151 (talk) 02:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 19:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Serbia and Montenegro-NATO relations → Serbia–NATO relations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Declined speedy; was auto-nominated for deletion as it was a double redirect through Serbia and Montenegro–NATO relations to Serbia–NATO relations. Appears to be useful as Serbia was federated with Montenegro between 1992-2006; target discusses this, but there is no separate article on the federation's NATO relations during that time. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I also endorse restoring the redirect with the endash. Courtesy ping Materialscientist - this was part of a batch deletion you did recently. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:46, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and restore the endashed version per nom. Serbia is the successor state to the previous Serbia and Montenegro, and the target has relevant information. Thryduulf (talk) 18:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 05:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Righteous People's Faith → Hero shrine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure what the connection is of this term with the target article, it's not mentioned there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The redirect originated as a link to Chinese hero cult, which is now BLAR'd. Appears to originate from a direct translation of the Chinese name for "heroes" (義民) listed there, that being "righteous people", if Wiktionary is correct and character-by-character translation is accurate. Randi Moth (talk) 17:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Randi Moth that is correct. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 22:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969 @Randi Moth considering that it’s not used at all could be deleted, but it remaining will make certain past revision of pages and such easier Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 13:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle: Can you clarify on this part but it remaining will make certain past revision of pages and such easier? Which page's past revisions is this about? The redirect page was created only 2 months back and was created as a redirect to Chinese hero cult. Jay 💬 05:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay sorry for the late response. the redirect was created then but that was related to a draftification and actually there was a page under that name for about 8 months in one form or another. See history here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_hero_cult&action=history Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 20:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle: This discussion is about the page Righteous People's Faith. Are you trying to say Chinese hero cult should not be deleted? No one has suggested deletion of Chinese hero cult. I assume you are fine with deleting Righteous People's Faith, it does not affect Chinese hero cult in any way. Jay 💬 08:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Not mentioned in any media under this translated name. The cross-language wiki can handle the characters. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:04, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 Normativity. (non-admin closure) ((ping|ClydeFranklin)) (t/c) 16:56, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Normative principle → Normative principle of worship  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Normative Principle → Norm  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

If the target Normative principle of worship is appropriate, both these redirects should point there. But there might be other "normative principles"? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment should this redirect to Normativity as with normative? Is "normative principle" a religious term? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget, probably to Normativity, which seems to be the right broad-concept article. "Normative principle" is too vague/broad to redirect to the worship-related article. We could possibly link Normative principle of worship from Normativity#See also though. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, that's a good idea. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 05:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

I am not seeing any affinity for the term "Tuyet" to the disambiguation page, TOA. Within the encyclopedia, "Tuyet" appears to be a component of a number of Vietnamese names, but nothing relevant to the current redirect target. BD2412 T 15:11, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• This was created in 2007 as an article about a fictional character in the Lego Bionicle franchise [1], and it was shortly afterwards redirected to a more general article that had a brief mention of this character. But that general article itself is now gone after an AfD. I guess that means it's unlikely Wikipedia will ever have any content about the character, so the article history here shouldn't get in the way of deletion. – Uanfala (talk) 13:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I've nominated several other redirects of this type for deletion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 12#Various Lego toas. – Uanfala (talk) 13:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 06:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The character is not mentioned anywhere in Wikipedia. There's other people who have this in their name, but only as a WP:PTM of a stage name, or as a middle name (I don't think creating a set indices for Vietnamese middle names is a good idea). 59.149.117.119 (talk) 06:40, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 05:32, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Arthur Feck → Joker in other media#Joker (2019)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo. The character is Arthur Fleck. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - refers to an evidently not-well-known image caption meme of the character telling a joke that doesn't have the expected impact. We have no information about the meme at this target nor anywhere on Wikipedia. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment typo by omission of a single character is a very likely form of typo. I have no opinion on whether to keep this or not otherwise. However, we should not assume that single character omissions are unlikely. -- 65.92.244.249 (talk) 05:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 current target is not ideal as the redirect term is not ChatGPT-specific, but related to GPT in general. There is agreement that the redirect would be useful if there was mention in an article. Jay 💬 06:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned in the target article. Apparently, entering this term into ChatGPT will break the AI. Addition of this term into the article could be trivial and could possibly violate WP:NOTGUIDE. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 14:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Not commenting on whether or not it should be deleted, but about WP:NOTGUIDE, I would say that its addition into the article would not be a violation. Sure, we shouldn't list every term found to have this effect, but adding a few examples and discussing briefly why it happens would be a fine addition to the article, most likely to the limitations section. – Popo Dameron talk 15:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I should note that multiple statements like this have been removed from the article in the past.[2][3] Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 16:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who removed that first one, so I can tell you that's a very different case :)

The instances you linked are anecdotal examples of 'tricking' the model into disobeying its instructions. This, on the other hand, is an actual bug in the code (that is backed by reliable sources) and not just an example of a "jailbreak". – Popo Dameron talk 18:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, a jailbreak is also an actual bug in the code. See Privilege escalation where it explicitly mentions that it is a bug. Also you haven’t actually provided any reliable sources that suggests that this should be included in the target article. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 14:49, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and expand the target page. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now - this term is an example of "weird" prompts that lie near the centroid of the vectorized word space of certain language models (such as earlier versions of ChatGPT) and which therefore produce unusual behaviour in the AI. These kinds of tokens are a legitimate vector of academic inquiry that are likely to show up in formal literature if they have not already (there has been extensive discussion in AI technical/research blogspaces). As such I'd leave this pointing here as the most relevant target until we can source a more robust section... definitely not a case of "not a guide" as this refers to a specific phenomenon rather than a "thing to avoid". 193.37.240.154 (talk) 12:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you actually have any reliables sources for this term to be added into the article? Also, blogs are not reliable sources. What you have said above says nothing on why we should keep this redirect. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 15:04, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I believe we should cover the topic of glitch tokens in some way, but I believe that a section at the ChatGPT article is a bad idea. The behaviour is identical with Bing Chat and all other GPT-3-based products, and moreover, milder glitches can be observed with GPT-2 as well (but nobody observed them before they were discovered on GPT-3). I would prefer a section at Generative pre-trained transformer or a separate article. Ain92 (talk) 16:35, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No mention has been added to the target, nor has an alternate target topic added to Generative pre-trained transformer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The term is mentioned in passing in The Washington Post and there's a bit more in Vice (marginally reliable publication in trivial cases). I'm not sure there's enough material to add to any target. Doesn't this seem too trivial and would the content pass WP:10YT? The name is so obscure that this redirect would only be helpful if the term is mentioned in the target (and there's some kind of consensus to add), but in borderline cases article content should not be written redirect-first. Politrukki (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – not mentioned at the target, and as User:Politrukki says, "in borderline cases article content should not be written redirect-first". It's not a particularly useful redirect anyway – this phrase is always or almost always found in sources about ChatGPT, so a reader searching for the term is likely trying to figure out whether "SolidGoldMagikarp" means anything in any other context, not to find information about ChatGPT in general. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, maybe arguably SolidGoldMagikarp should even be its own page, or something similar to this should be. Mathmo ^Talk 10:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As said above, most reliable sources only mention this term in passing. The only reason this term is known is because of a software bug. There is no way that this term meets WP:GNG. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 17:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment is this some kind of glitch or easter egg? It really should be mentioned in the article as a section. Otherwise it could redirect to Magikarp. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:55, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @AngusWOOF: there's a hypothesis that this is a glitch that was caused by feeding the model data from Reddit conversations. Nothing certain. SolidGoldMagikarp is a Reddit username that means nothing without proper context. The glitch is apparently in multiple versions of GPT (I have no information about GPT-4, which was released to the public after this nomination), and is not ChatGPT-specific which suggests ChatGPT would be a poor target. I would love to support something like what Ain92 said, but I don't think the sourcing is there yet. It's very much possible that in the future someone publishes a paper in scholarly sources about this or similar topics, in which case a redirect could be justifiable. Politrukki (talk) 15:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I just checked on GPT-4, and yes, it absolutely does glitch with them at temperature 0. In fact, even if you just ask to repeat " SolidGoldMagikarp" in quotes, it starts writing poetry about rate limiting for LLM users (I could share an excerpt if it is relevant). I might have hit a rate limit not realising it. Anyway, at least one glitch token was definitely detected in GPT-4.

  The working theory is that these tokens were included because a counting subreddit (literally counting from 1 to infinity, nothing else), certain pieces of programming/HTML code and a game wiki were included in the tokenizing, but then removed from the training data as garbage, so the model has these tokens it has never seen in its life (imagine a third eye looking inside your head, which is never reached by light: you would be very surprised if in a scientific experiment that eye activated) and therefore can't normally predict them. The tokens were initialized in embedding spaces in different places depending on the model version, and that's likely why different models exhibit different glitch behavior. There is research ongoing on the topic, but most of it is self-published or sometimes even tweeted out. Ain92 (talk) 17:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC) PS Here's https://www.vice.com/en/article/epzyva/ai-chatgpt-tokens-words-break-reddit [a VICE article from February] BTW.[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 05:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Chem. Eur. → Chemistry: A European Journal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term. The abbreviation for the journal would be Chem. Eur. J. not Chem. Eur. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:CHEAP, seems unambiguous, and it seems plausible some searchers would omit the "J." Mdewman6 (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Then those people woud likely be looking for ChemistryEurope, not this journal. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:15, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Headbomb: Then perhaps a disambiguation would be better, as Chemistry Europe has a page, too? Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, but that's not what an abbreviated Chem. Eur. would refer to, as Chemistry Europe is the publisher, and the abbreviations are for journals. At best it would be a typo for the abbreviated version of the ChemistryEurope journal. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:16, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A reminder that people looking for Chem. Eur. would be looking for a ChemistryEurope, an entirely different journal. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate between the two things for which people reasonably might be looking. BD2412 T 14:04, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia doesn't have an article on the other journal, so there's nothing to disambiguate, and if we had, then it would point to that journal. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm not understanding the reason for keeping here; journal abbreviations are a systematic format, so someone choosing the wrong one does not seem plausible. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Headbomb and Pppery, and per WP:RFD#D5. As I understand it, this redirect is akin to having a redirect President of Canada that targets Mary Simon. It's not a typo, it's wrong. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Facepalm, see #President of Canada on this page. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

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 💬 05:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• EC Warriner (E.C. Warriner) → E. C. Warriner  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Improper page name ~ Eejit43 (talk) 03:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Tagged for speedy deletion per criterion R3. Didn't qualify for speedy deletion since it was created due to a problematic page move… so never mind that. However, deletion still seems best in my book. CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Unlikely search term with. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:10, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above: repeating the name in parentheses does not help with anything and just makes the redirect useless/an unlikely search term instead. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:09, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as housekeeping. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).