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. --BDD (talk) 22:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Stockholm/S, Sweden → Stockholm  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Stockholm/G, Sweden → Stockholm  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

When I search "G Sweden" I get Gothenburg, and "S Sweden" gives me Sweden. These are inappropriate subpages per WP:SUB, it doesn't appear that the target is correct (WP:RFD#D2) and/or makes no sense (WP:RFD#D5), and they seem to be obscure terms (WP:RFD#D8). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:46, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep These terms are both used in the WP:Tilastopaja database in the Wikipedia Library. It is subscription required, so the terms would not show up in a web search. Where I find them they're used to refer to the host city of the BAUHAUS-galan and Globen Galan, both of which are in Stockholm, so I think the target is appropriate.

The WP:SUB argument is interesting, but then looking at that page, per WP:TITLESLASH it appears that it is perfectly acceptable to have forward slashes in the titles of articles. --Habst (talk) 15:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The burden is on users of external tools to comply with Wikipedia's standards, not on Wikipedia to violate it's own standards for the sake of external tools. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:36, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for the response @Pppery. What Wikipedia standards are being violated by having this redirect? From my perspective, we would be violating Wikipedia standards by not having the redirect, because per WP:RPURPOSE Alternate forms of a name as found in reliable sources and common databases, policy dictates that if an alternate name like this is used in a database, it fulfills the reason for creating and maintaining a redirect. --Habst (talk) 16:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The nomination statement itself explains exactly what standards are violated. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi @Pppery, thank you. Here's what I would say about the standards mentioned in the nomination:

  • WP:SUB: This seems invalid because the page says (on WP:TITLESLASH) that it is perfectly acceptable to have forward slashes in a page title.
  • WP:RDEL#D2: The target is correct, because unlike the Andrew vs. Adam example in D2, there is no other conceivable target for the redirect.
  • WP:RDEL#D5: The redirect makes sense because it is used to refer to the target, and every part of the title has meaning.
  • WP:RDEL#D8: The redirect isn't in a language other than English, and it is used (at least) hundreds of times in WP:Tilastopaja.

  Which of these do you think is being violated by having the redirect?

  --Habst (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete My searches didn't turn up much in Swedish or English. I found a handful of places where Stockholm G seemed to refer to Gamla Stan, the old town which is a part of the city. Similarly Stockholm S is regularly used to refer to Stockholm South. With this formatting however it seems meaningless to me and retaining it is only likely to cause confusion, especially when there are two reasonable targets. --Trialpears (talk) 12:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi @Trialpears, thank you for the search. Those targets make sense to me given the context. What would you think about redirecting Stockholm/S, Sweden → Söderort (also known as "South Stockholm") and Stockholm/G, Sweden → Gamla stan? --Habst (talk) 14:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I guess that's fine, but I don't really see a use for these redirects nor a reason why anyone would write it this weird way. Stockholm/S has the extra wrinkle that Stockholm also has the area Södermalm which is the south of the city center. It has a lot more cultural relevance than Söderort and many times the page views and could reasonably be denoted as Stockholm S as well. --Trialpears (talk) 16:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Retarget per Habst to Söderort and Gamla stan, but keeping at current target is not useful. Jay 💬 11:12, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:31, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The Ashes (rugby league); 2023– → The Ashes (rugby league)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Ashes (rugby league; 2023–) → The Ashes (rugby league)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible disambiguator with the semicolon, followed by an open en dash. The second of these two redirects has history, however. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:03, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The one with history seems to have been merged into The Ashes (rugby league) without proper attribution. I'm not entirely sure how to best resolve that? Does a hist merge need to happen or can someone leave a dummy edit along the lines of "Content merged from The Ashes (rugby league; 2023–). See that page's history for attribution". Having said that, if needed for attribution count me as a keep on the redirect with history. I'm fine with the other being deleted. TartarTorte 14:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both. In addition to the attribution requirements these seems like plausible and unambiguous search terms. Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Unusual for a semicolon to be used in that way on Wikipedia, and likely the only people looking for this term would be regular Wikipedia users. Yoblyblob (talk) 14:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  likely the only people looking for this term would be regular Wikipedia user what makes you say that? Thryduulf (talk) 20:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:51, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the first because of the semicolon following the disambiguator, and the trailing hyphen. The page was at this title for only one minute after creation, and the creator moved it to a different title. Move without redirect the second to The Ashes rugby league. Jay 💬 10:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Joel Peguero → Washington Nationals minor league players#Joel Peguero  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

non notable minor league baseball player, not mentioned at target article and no longer in Nationals organization Spanneraol (talk) 16:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Gerson Moreno → Washington Nationals minor league players#Gerson Moreno  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

non notable minor league baseball player, he is not mentioned at the target article and is no longer in the Nationals organization Spanneraol (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rafael Lantigua → Toronto Blue Jays minor league players#Rafael Lantigua  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

non notable minor league baseball player, not mentioned at target article and no longer in Blue Jays organization Spanneraol (talk) 16:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:32, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Stevie Berman → Toronto Blue Jays minor league players#Stevie Berman  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Non notable minor league baseball player, not mentioned on target article and no longer part of the Blue Jays organization Spanneraol (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:33, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 23:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Michelangelo's David" → David (Michelangelo)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bizarre formatting with the single parentheses at the end. The proper Michelangelo's David already exists, so there is no functional reason that I can think of for this to exist. Delete TNstingray (talk) 13:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This was created as a duplicate article in 2005 but was retargetted 8 minutes later. If it was created today it would have been speedily deleted under A10 (but that criterion didn't exist back then). Thryduulf (talk) 10:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Muscle Mary → LGBT slang#English  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned anymore at the target page. Delete, or turn into a soft redirect to Wiktionary? Tea2min (talk) 08:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 09:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, no incoming links. Jay 💬 10:35, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 disambiguate. By moving over Su Zhu (disambiguation). Jay 💬 15:02, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Su Zhu → Hua Guofeng  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The options are: A) Hua Guofeng is primary topic, retain the status quo on the redirect and delete Su Zhu (disambiguation) per WP:ONEOTHER; B) no primary topic, delete the redirect and move Su Zhu (disambiguation) over it; C) Three Arrows Capital is primary topic, retarget the redirect and delete Su Zhu (disambiguation) per WP:ONEOTHER. There are aspects of this that belong on RfD, RM, and AfD, but there's no single platform whose scope encompasses all the possibilities so I've picked RfD as the most reasonable place to hold the discussion.

Nearly all Google results for "Su Zhu" that I can find are for the 3AC cofounder. While Hua Guofeng is certainly a more important person than the 3AC cofounder, he isn't really referred to as Su Zhu in English sources much at all. So to say that Hua Guofeng is primary topic of "Su Zhu" is like saying Barack Obama is primary topic of "BO" - yes, he is the most important topic that could plausibly be referred to as BO, but when people say BO, they aren't overwhelmingly more likely to be referring to Obama than all other topics. We have the same situation here, so I feel B (disambiguation) is the right approach, with C as second choice. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• procedural close per WP:WRONGFORUM. It's actually a move request and not a valid redirect discussion request per closing notes. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 01:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @NmWTfs85lXusaybq: Only one of my options involves a move. And the WP:RM instructions say: "Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves." So it would not appropriate to discuss retargeting Su Zhu at RM. There is not a single forum that this fits precisely under, so why do you claim that RM is superior to RfD here? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It's a RM since you prefer moving the dab page to the base name per WP:NOPRIMARY. As for the option of WP:ONEOTHER, the proper forum is AfD or PROD proposed on the dab page. However, in neither of cases, a RfD of the primary redirect is preferred, because it won't be listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Article alerts. If you would like not to choose any of these options, you may not be a nominator but a commenter when a related discussion is started. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 04:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No, this is a structural problem with our naming/disambiguation discussion procedures. If a situation has only one possible alternative to the status quo, then it is clear what procedure should be used. But in a three-way choice, we may have the situation where one of the two non-status-quo choices requires RfD and the other of the two requires RM (and obviously, the status quo is compatible with both RfD and RM). So you would argue that if I preferred C as my top choice, this RfD would be correct? Nonsense. Choice of forum should depend on the range of choices available to all !voters, not simply what the nominator prefers. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Of course not. It's nonsense to use RfD in this case for any option as I argued. If A or C is preferred, the proper way is asking for AfD of the dab page. "Redirects cannot be used as current titles in requested moves" doesn't means the outcome of RM discussion can't be WP:ONEOTHER as long as a move for WP:NOPRIMARY is properly proposed by using the redirect as target title. Since when the choice of forum must cover all available choices of the case? Besides, as this is a RfD thread, the option B you preferred is actually retargeting to Su Zhu (disambiguation). NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 10:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry, maybe the WP:ONEOTHER bit is conflating things a little. C is very much a standard RfD-style request to retarget, and A is just the status quo. Deletion of the disambiguation page is the natural consequence of choosing either A or C, but if that's too confusing we can strike that and open an (IMO unnecessarily bureaucratic) AfD after/if this closes as A or C. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  From my understanding, you actual argument is retargeting the base name Su Zhu to Su Zhu (disambiguation) or Hua Guofeng while leaving the other work to technical deletions G6. If so, it seems fine to me although this discussion won't be listed in article alerts to notify editors from WikiProject Disambiguation with an invested interest. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Leaving the debate about the fora aside, there hasn't been much discussion about the actual nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 08:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Su Zhu (businessperson) is shown to be more popular than Su Zhu from the page view this year before its removal from the dab page and could be a clear primary topic with respect to usage. However, Su Zhu (businessperson) is just a redirect to an article related to the person and more entries have been recently added to this dab page. Thus, I also prefer moving Su Zhu (disambiguation) over Su Zhu as a dab page with no primary topic. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 12:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 no consensus. Jay 💬 09:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Native forest → Old-growth forest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Term not included. Hildeoc (talk) 10:34, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Native" in this context implies forests made up of endemic and well-adapted species. Old growth forests will usually consist of exactly those (or else they would have died out or be in the process of dying). A literal match of terms in this case thus would be nice, but certainly is not necessary here. It could still be achieved very easily. -- Kku (talk) 10:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. There seems to be a difference in the meaning of this term in the British Isles and North America. In the UK it means forests comprised of species native to the British Isles so Old-growth forests are native forests, but not all native forests are old-growth forests. For example Heartwood Forest is described as the "largest new native forest in England" in the article and in sources [1][2].
  On the other side of the Atlantic its use seems to correspond mostly with the definition at [3] (paragraph 33, page 6/PDF page 11) "“Native Forest” means forests occurring naturally in an area, as neither a direct nor indirect consequence of human activity post-dating European settlement.". There are multiple different brands/projects with "Native Forest" as/in the name though, complicating search results (excluding the word "coconut" does help a bit).
  Native woodland redirects to Native species, reflecting the British use. This term seems to be the most commonly used in relation to Scotland and upland in the rest of the UK; it seems to be less common (outside of phrases like "native woodland species") in US English although it does get some use e.g.. [4] but which definition that paper uses isn't clear from the abstract.
  Indigineous forest/Indiginous woodland seem to be the preferred terms in Africa and south east Asia/Oceania but there is overlap between the "forests comprising native species" and "forests managed/inhabited by indigenous peoples" meanings.
  Overall I'm really not sure what's best here, but keeping it as is probably isn't it. Thryduulf (talk) 12:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambig due to many different uses of the term. Yoblyblob (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — no comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 08:20, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 03:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Graziani + Corazza → Architect  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This company is also not mentioned at the target article. It's only mentioned twice across the entire mainspace: the infoboxes for Aura (Toronto) and Residences of College Park. I would suggest deletion given the absence of a suitable target and the company's lack of notability. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 02:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Strange redirect that doesn't actually help inform our readers about the company. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ✗plicit 03:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Stanford Downey Architects Inc. → Architect  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Company is not currently mentioned in the article; it wasn't either at the time of the redirect's creation. Elsewhere, it's only mentioned in passing at The Omni King Edward Hotel#History and at Hilton Niagara Falls Tower 2's infobox. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 02:32, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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