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 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:37, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Count Fritz von Rosen → Gustaf-Fredrik von Rosen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Christoher Lee wasn't engaged to Agnes von Rosen (1924-2001), daughter ofGustaf-Fredrik von Rosen (1895-1956, but to Henriette von Rosen (1933-2016), daugther of Fritz von Rosen ( 1899-1969) https://archive.org/details/lordofmisruleaut0000leec/page/220/mode/ https://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00663301&tree=LEO--QTHCCAN (talk) 19:56, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Unclear nomination. I honestly don't get what the nom is proposing. @QTHCCAN: Could you please clarify your rationale? Would you like to delete, or choose a new target? CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I think what nom is saying is that this redirect, which is linked only from Christopher Lee, is incorrect because Count Fritz von Rosen is different from Gustaf-Fredrik von Rosen, and the confusion about similarity could be stemming from the fact that both had a daughter called Agnes. Countess Henriette Ewa Agnes von Rosen (Fritz's daughter and Lee's fiancee) is different from Agnes von Rosen (Gustaf's daughter). Delete since there is no better target. Jay 💬 08:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  You're absolutely right. I initially put the DB template for a speedy deletion, but I've been told it was more appropriate to pass through WP:RFD. The factual error about Christopher Lee swedish fiancée was also on the Agnes von Rosen article, but was basically reused the same reference than on the Christopher Lee's page. In fact, the page from the listed reference wasn't even right. QTHCCAN (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  So, yes Delete. QTHCCAN (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and Jay. Thanks to the nom for clarifying. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:00, 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 03:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per WP:RDAB due to lack of space between title and disambiguator. The title with the correct spacing, Mole (unit), is the target of the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 17:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Skynxnex (talk) 19:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete although its existed since 2012 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:32, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: classic WP:RDAB. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 15:59, 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 03:26, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• 괌도 → Hangul  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 미국령 괌 → Hangul  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 괌섬 → Hangul  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

When translated, these all appear to related to Guam. The first redirect translates to "Guam too", the second to "US Guam", and the third to "Guam Island". Unclear connection to the target and none of these appear to be useful redirect search terms, even if the target was changed to Guam (WP:RLOTE.). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The first one 괌도 is also just "Guam island" I think. (도 is 島...) Anyway, these serve no obvious purpose, and I suggest deletion. Imaginatorium (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom. The current redirects' target offers nothing useful. Also, why these particular ones and not Korean translations for everyplace on earth? Clarityfiend (talk) 09:46, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Guam is not an alphabet -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 06:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I can confirm that all three refer to Guam. The first one translates to Guam Island/Prefecture; the second one translates to "the US territory of Guam"; and the third one translates to "the island of Guam". ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 17:45, 14 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 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:36, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Thomas Dickey → Lynx (web browser)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirecting to lynx isn't really great, because Dickey maintains tons of stuff, including some project that are probably more wide-spread and better known (xterm, ncurses); there isn't really an obviously "best" page to link to, so just delete it is better, especially since nothing links here any more anyway. Arp242 (talk) 11:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me (I can't remember why I created that redirection anyway) A1415 (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

oh, I didn't .. I was notified merely because I once made a minor edit on the BLP article that was there before it was turned into a redirect A1415 (talk) 11:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The suggestion I made at the AfD was to make a disambiguation page along the lines of "Projects maintained by Thomas Dickey". I don't object to deletion either, I agree that the redirect adds little value at the moment. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with that too, if that's an option; I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other – I just really hate clicking links only to end up nowhere useful, which is what happened to me here. (sorry about the blanking earlier by the way – it's been a while and I forgot how MediaWiki works 🙃). Arp242 (talk) 12:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After thinking about it, I think that delete is the better option. While Dickey is involved in several notable projects, he doesn't seem to be independently notable, and the maintenance involved in keeping lists currents doesn't look worthwhile. Meanwhile, redirecting to one of the projects is non-ideal. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 12:46, 3 November 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) 15:43, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Is the "group of volunteers" to which Dickey belongs that does all this maintenance itself notable? Does it have a name or designation of some sort? BD2412 T 17:41, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no single plausible target, and non-notable per WP:Articles for deletion/Thomas Dickey. Jay 💬 09:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, the article only mentions Dickey's name once and simply specifies he leads the volunteers group.QTHCCAN (talk) 19:01, 19 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 moot. ✗plicit 14:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Franz Holzweber → Otto Planetta  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

May cause confusion for users as there are numerous articles that refer to "Franz Holzweber" (see here). ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 14:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is now solved since the redirection got replaced by an actual article about Franz Holzweber. QTHCCAN (talk) 20:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:11, 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 keep and refine to Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars#Genocide classification. --BDD (talk) 22:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Albanian genocide → Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a helpful or useful redirect. The redirect name is vague and not one that's common or applied in sources for anyone to search for when seeking the target article, which itself is a descriptive title. Griboski (talk) 16:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Disambiguate Refine to Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars#Genocide classification This is how the event is commonly referred to in some socialist and Albanian circles. If you have concerns about the name being ambiguous, then it can be turned into a disambiguator page or a disambiguator can be added to the directed article. PS: After thinking about it, I think turning it into a disambiguator is the correct solution, since the Expulsion of Chams, the Ethnic Cleansing in the Kosovo War, the atrocities in WWI and the interwar period, and the persecution of Kosovo Serbs in WWII could be referred to in this redirect. To make this term more specific to the 1912 massacres, a redirected can be created that simply include the year afterwards. PS #2: This term is mostly used for the target article, refining it to the genocide classification section seems like a better solution. Yung Doohickey (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yung Doohickey, could you add information about this in the article? I think we should keep the redirect only if such Albanian circles refer to it under the specific term "Albanian genocide". If they only call it a genocide, which happens to refer to Albanians, the term is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH and should be deleted. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 15:05, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is how the event was referred to in Juka's translation of Albania's Golgotha (a major source for the target article).[here] It is also referred like this in some socialist publications.[1][2] It's also somewhat common name in Albanian areas of social media. Yung Doohickey (talk) 19:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Social media is irrelevant. The two "publications" you linked to are random far-left/communist blogs and websites which wouldn't pass WP:RS. We need evidence that it is used commonly enough in an abundances of sources, not a few cherry-picked places. In this case, how historiography and reliable sources refer to a subject is important. --Griboski (talk) 23:06, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that this redirect is probably common enough to be useful. One of the far left sources I listed is the third search result on google when "massacres of Albanians" is searched. It's not RS but it is relatively prominent. Albania's Golgotha isn't really cheery-picked, since it's a very prominently used source in the target article. Yung Doohickey (talk) 05:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No comments since the last one.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final attempt at further participation. Also notified of this discussion at the target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The term is completely fictional and non-existent in scholarship. I agree with SD.Alexikoua (talk) 20:55, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The third search result on google is a far-left article named the "Albanian Genocide". It is also a term used in Juka's translation of Albania's Golgotha. The term is also useful since there's an entire section discussing scholarly opinion on a genocide classification. Yung Doohickey (talk) 07:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The war crimes against Albanians in the Kosovo War are also referred to as the Albanian genocide (or Kosovo Albanian genocide), which is why I changed my vote to disambiguate. Yung Doohickey (talk) 07:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I can't find any RS citations that describe Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars as the Albanian genocide. This is a term that is being pushed by one editor that isn't in line with the majority of scholars. A number of quotes were recently added to the page, however they too do not refer to this event as the "Albanian genocide". ElderZamzam (talk) 07:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Juka's translation of Albania's Golgotha at one point refers to the events as the "Albanian Genocide". A redirect doesn't have to be a term used by a scholarly majority. PS: You can access some of the content from Juka's translation, including the mention of the "Albanian Genocide" [[1]]. Yung Doohickey (talk) 07:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Refine to Massacres of Albanians in the Balkan Wars#Genocide question. Jay 💬 13:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This is probably a better idea, since "Albanian genocide" being searched on google has the target article as the first result. Yung Doohickey (talk) 07:32, 22 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]

• Mao Zedong genocide → Great Leap Forward#Consequences  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Controversial redirect whose article to which it is targeted does not mention that the name of the redirect is the common name. Also, it was created by a sockpuppet user. 2x2leax (talk) 05:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, it's not a common name, and it's inflammatory and misleading on several levels. Remsense聊 16:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. What genocide? What ethnic group was Mao trying to wipe out? The Chinese? (If so, he failed miserably.) Clarityfiend (talk) 09:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete could be derisive of the Red Guards and the Cultural Revolution as well (cultural genocide) -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 06:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment see also the related discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 10#Mao_Genocide -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 02:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• A look at some of the redirect's targets that got moved over time: Landlord Classicide under Mao Zedong which was moved to Mass killings of landlords under Mao Zedong moved to Chinese Land Reform Movement (1947-1976) moved to Land Reform Movement. Also Class purges under Mao Zedong. The current target did not come about as part of the moves, but was a bold retarget by an IP in 2019. If any of the titles can be seen as similar to the redirect under discussion, then retarget to the appropriate target. Jay 💬 06:28, 16 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).