Useless redirect. We never have articles for failed candidates unless they are notable, not even as redirects to the seat they failed to win. If we do have articles for failed candidates who haven't been elected to any office prior to failing to be elected then again they have to be notable (e.g Katherine Deves is notable because of her outspoken controversial views and her political activism, plus her preselection itself was controversial). Sam Boughton isn't notable and he was Labor's unsuccessful candidate for Terrigal (a seat the Liberals retained). I'm not sure why this article was even created in the first place but I think it should be deleted per notability guidelines and for consistency with every other article. 37.0.81.236 (talk) 23:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Per WP:RFDHOWTO you're supposed to marktag the redirect you nominated. I did it for you. Also something seems messed up here considering the "add new entries" comment is below the nomination but I'll let someone who knows what they're doing fix that. Nickps (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC);edited 00:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Now, I don't like rewarding work with more work but something else I noticed is that since I tagged the redirect on March 30 UTC, the link in the RfD notice sends people to that day's log. Is that fixable? Nickps (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and done. For future reference you can use the days=n parameter of the rfd template to do this automatically, n is number of days before the current day the redirect was nominated, e.g. for to tag a redirect nominated yesterday (or to add a redirect to a discussion on yesterday's page) use ((subst:rfd|days=1|content=.... Thryduulf (talk) 03:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per nom, but I wouldn't be opposed to restoring the article which can be sent to AfD if desired, but it has just a single source in a BLP [1]. A7V2 (talk) 00:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Random apostrophe at the start suggests WP:G6 but, since Court of attachment does not exist, I wanted to be sure. Nickps (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's literally just a random apostrophe that makes this redirect practically useless Okmrman (talk) 03:43, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move: to Court of attachment to redirect to Royal forest#Courts as its creator clearly attended. Then delete the apostrophe version. Jim Killock(talk) 08:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI, page movers can move pages without leaving redirects. So, your proposal can be executed easier that way. Nickps (talk) 15:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for excess apostrophe. Create new redirect as required, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move without redirect per Jim. The creator had the right intention but an apostrophe came in the way. Jay 💬 06:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Appy 'Ampstead'
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 23:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be a mistake. The target mentions " 'Appy 'Ampstead", notice the lack of a single quote at the end indicating that the first single quote was intended to be an apostrophe (like the second). Nickps (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2024 (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).
Actressed featured in several other shows, including a Buffy episode, Kids Incorporated and The Bachelor (1999 film). Does not seem to have enough sources for an independent article. PAge has been edit-warred back and forth from a near-sourcless article to a redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 21:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore without prejudice to AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Blatta Guziki
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 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Contested WP:PROD candidate. Still an invalid name (WP:SPECIES), no point on a redirect to parent genus. If the species gets accepted, I'm happy for restoration. Until then the redirect, nor article, serves no purpose. NotAGenious (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Restore and send to AfD as a contested PROD and contested BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 19:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good idea. Can it be boldly done, or do we need this discussion to conclude? NotAGenious (talk) 20:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without redirect. It doesn't exist. It's not a scientific name, it's not even a misspelling of a scientific name (see here. As far as I can see, it's nothing, except possibly someone's "in-joke" pretending there's a cockroach named after one of his friends/enemies. It smells entirely like a practical joke, and doesn't need to be here. Dyanega (talk) 00:59, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the redirect if Blatta is not a valid species. No need to restore, just delete the page. Gjs238 (talk) 14:56, 1 April 2024 (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).
Battle Searcher
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 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. According to Bulbapedia, this is the directly-translated Japanese name of the Vs. Seeker, a Key Item from the 3rd Gen Kanto and 4th Gen Sinnoh games. We don't need info on this-- We're not Bulbapedia.𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:24, 30 March 2024 (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).
Muhammad Murtadlo Dimyathi
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 per WP:CSD#G6. Thryduulf (talk) 19:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A typo by an editor. Quickly moved. Викидим (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2024 (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).
Mecha Break
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 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable game announced at the show and just mentioned as an item of the list in the target page. If it becomes notable, WP:RFD#DELETE #10 would still apply. Викидим (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteWP:REDLINK discourages this practice of making totally useless redirects that will make articles seem like they exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:12, 5 April 2024 (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).
Silphscope
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 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Silph Scope is also a redirect with the same target which should be added to the nomination. There seems to be some history here, it looks like at some point stubs for the subject existed at Silphscope, Silph Scope and Silph scope, even simultaneously. Nickps (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It is a key plot item in the games but is otherwise non-notable outside of the verse. --Lenticel(talk) 02:57, 31 March 2024 (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 First Berserker: Khazan
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 23:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable game announced at the show and just mentioned as an item of the list in the target page. If it becomes notable, WP:RFD#DELETE #10 would still apply. Викидим (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteWP:REDLINK discourages this practice of making totally useless redirects that will make articles seem like they exist. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:12, 5 April 2024 (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 23:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems useless and potentially misleading. From the history it appears that someone made an article under the title about a music album's review score in some magazine, it was nominated for speedy, and someone else rounded the number off and redirected it. Trovatore (talk) 16:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I uh, think HotMess is saying that this isn't notable? ...Not sure why zhe'd use WP:NFRINGE over WP:GNG or other notability tests. The conclusion is correct, though, 7.9 isn't a notable number. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2024 (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 immigration control is not illegal immigration, but the fight against it (among other things), my first choice is therefore keep. If this is a no-go for some reason, then dabify it per Lunamann. --Викидим (talk) 21:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
redirect term is not found in article nor is it likely to be a common search term TarnishedPathtalk 14:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This seems like a very plausible search term to me. Dozens of hits on Google for this phrase. - Presidentmantalk · contribs (Talkback) 14:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Very plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 15:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Referring to "Family of (blank)" as the "(blank) family" is rather common in English, especially for famous/important figures. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:40, 29 March 2024 (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).
I just created this. But to be on the safe side, I wanted to ask for opinions, as this is actually a psychological term that does not appear in the given target as such, in fact. Hildeoc (talk) 12:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. My first thought is that a fallacy is only one type of faulty thinking, others being using incorrect logic, extrapolating from a misunderstanding, etc. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Uhh, "using incorrect logic" is a formal fallacy, "extrapolating from a misunderstanding" is (at a minimum) an informal fallacy. Paradoctor (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Questionthis is actually a psychological term Can you provide a source defining this psychological term? The only uses I could find were all literal uses, i. e. talking about thinking that is faulty. Thinking is more general than reasoning/arguing, and from what I've seen, a case could be made to target cognitive biases instead, or in addition. Paradoctor (talk) 17:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Paradoctor: Thanks for taking an interest. Well, if you google the term (using quotes), the hits you get are like almost exclusively related to uses in a psychological context; cf., e.g., here. Hildeoc (talk) 05:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
two [...] conceptions of faulty thinking That's two different terms. So we'd need to a) disambiguate, b) find articles to link to, which are defining these idioms. Alternatively a set index article would also be conceivable, though this would require a whole lot more sources.
More to the point, the hits are uses, not definitions / discussions of the concept. Extracting definitions from usage would be WP:SYNTHESISParadoctor (talk) 06:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Metaltron
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 14:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No mention of this name or term in Wikipedia. No incoming links. The target is quite an exhaustive article and there are multiple articles dealing with Daleks, but none have mention of what a Metaltron is. External searches link the name to Dalek in fansites, but having this redirect doesn't inform a reader on Wikipedia any further. Suggest to Delete. Jay 💬 08:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. As a note, if this should point anywhere, it should point to Dalek (Doctor Who episode), where one of the characters refers to a Dalek by this moniker. However, the article does not currently mention this in its current state. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:16, 29 March 2024 (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).
Eastman Village is not mentioned at the target article. The only mention of "Eastman" is in a link to the Kodak article. Utopes(talk / cont) 01:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be a new housing estate on the site of a Kodak[2]. Maybe it should me covered in the target. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article has "a large industrial premises was built in 1890 by the American Eastman Kodak company in Wealdstone, and by 1965 there were over 100 buildings on a 55-acre site at Kodak Harrow, employing 5,500 people", which I believe is now Eastman Village. I would want a better source than what I have to actually add this to the article, though. Rusalkii (talk) 20:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No mention has yet been added to the target. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A vague name that is not mentioned at the target page, yet can reasonably imply other punctuation topics. The history is possibly the most 2005 of them all, created in 6 edits by an editors' only 6 edits. However, it has dubious usefulness as a redirect here. Utopes(talk / cont) 03:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Seems to denote :] or :[, which can indeed be emoticons, but I'm not sure this 'spelling out' of an emoticon is a useful and plausible search term? ...What, is it meant for people searching for emoticons using speech to text?? (6_9) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Very clearly takes people to the content they are looking for, it's not ambiguous or in the way of anything else so it's both helpful and harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoristalk! 21:09, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoristalk! 21:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. Jay 💬 08:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No search result on Google except a joke comment on Reddit. Northern Moonlight 07:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Bhārat is an alternate name for India as per Names_for_India#Bhārata, and searching "Bhārat Rupee" (or indeed, Bharat Rupee) on Google immediately pulls up information (including Google's exchange rate calculator) for the Indian Rupee. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lunamann. English Wikipedia is used by millions of people in India, who may very well search for "Bharat Rupee". Also, I see several hundred Google results including Twitter posts, blogs, etc. Kk.urban (talk) 18:47, 29 March 2024 (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).
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vận động viên trung lập cá nhân tại Thế vận hội mùa hè 2024
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 💬 08:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vietnamese translation of title, clear WP:RLANG fail (the neutral athletes are Russian and Belurusian). Rusalkii (talk) 04:39, 29 March 2024 (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).
LGBT rights in Mzansi
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 💬 08:02, 5 April 2024 (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).
History of the socialism in Finland
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 per WP:CSD#G6. Thryduulf (talk) 12:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Accidental creation at this title; was immediately moved. Unlikely mistake when searching. Rusalkii (talk) 04:01, 29 March 2024 (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).
I'll note that I unmarked SpaceX Transporter missions as I feel like that is probably the only legitimate redirect out of that set. Ergzay (talk) 02:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep they are missions called Transporter X, so pluralize that would be Transporters. They are launched on Falcon 9s from SpaceX, thus they make logical sense. I don't see where the implications the nominator is suggesting comes from. From the way that disambiguation works on Wikipedia, something called Transporter associated with SpaceX and Falcon 9 is being indicated, and not some sentence structure. So SpaceX Transporters would be a plural form redirect of the Transporter mission set from SpaceX, and not some science fiction device. That would be the grammatical meaning. Where do you get teleportation from any of this? It doesn't say teleporter. SpaceX is operating a transport mission on a Falcon 9, called "Transporter #", so there is transportation occuring, on a Falcon 9 rocket operated by SpaceX. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 07:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They would not pluralize to Transporters. The missions are properly called "Transporter-1 mission" so would pluralize to Transporter missions. You cannot call them "Transporters". For example see: https://www.spacex.com/launches/transporter-5/ "Transporters" is a common name that teleportation is given in science-fiction. Ergzay (talk) 17:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment every nominated redirect must be tagged and listed here. If there are too many to do easily, ask an AWB user for help. Thryduulf (talk) 12:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PROD'd by user:Ergzay, who states "Destination page no longer contains info regarding this and no page on Wikipedia exists for this. Best to return this to non-existence and let someone create it when it's needed." PROD can only be used on actual articles, so I'm moving this here as a courtesy. StreetcarEnjoyer(talk) 01:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't aware you couldn't use the template for this purpose. The documentation isn't very clear.
As to the matter at hand, even with the change in the redirect done by @N2e it still doesn't talk anything about a propellant plant. It looks like N2e did a bunch of editing to add some details quickly, but I'm not sure if this was just restoring old content that was previously deleted or not. It might get removed again given that that page has been pared down a ton from what it was because of low quality sourcing. Ergzay (talk) 02:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, propellant plant is mentioned and discussed at target. No other conflicting articles on Wikipedia according to nom, WP:CHEAP. Utopes(talk / cont) 03:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Interplanetary spaceflight#Propellant plant on a celestial body where the plant is actually discussed. A propellant plant is mentioned at the current target, but only in passing, and in such a manner that one would have to alreay know what it was to get anything useful from it (the kind of place a bluelink would be useful). A7V2 (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That target only has a passing mention of "SpaceX propellant plant", although it does go more in depth with propellant plants there. Going to the SpaceX specific article might be preferable for people that include "SpaceX" in the search term, although I don't mind either option. Utopes(talk / cont) 05:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was my interpretation (perhaps incorrect) that the section, while not written that well, was more or less entirely about the SpaceX plan. The last paragraph at least is entirely about it, not what I'd call a passing mention. A7V2 (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. SpaceX need for, and intent to place on Mars, propellant equipment is discussed at the target. There are clearly few details, but the notable SpaceX endeavor to build a Mars-capable large spacecraft is covered in hundreds of sources, and that spacecraft (now flying in a test program), will need the Mars-generated propellant to refill it on Mars making SpaceX discussion of the propellant facility also notable, as also shown by sources at the redirect target. N2e (talk) 10:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear to be a useful redirect. Has previously been tagged for R3. BangJan1999 00:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: It is sold as Raindrops on the Open Road (ROTOR) on Bandcamp - but not as Raindrops on the Open Road (ROTOR) - EP. 🔥HOTm̵̟͆e̷̜̓s̵̼̊s̸̜̃🔥 (talk・edits) 00:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative Keep as ((R from unnecessary disambiguation)) and ((R from incorrect disambiguation)). While HOTmess is correct in that it's not *sold* as such, I'd like to point out that this is an EP, as stated by our own article on it. Thus, I can totally see someone unfamiliar with how disambiguators work on Wikipedia using the Bandcamp title for the EP and then tacking " - EP" on the end. (Unfortunately, this was created yesterday, and so, page views won't be a helpful metric here.) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]