< March 7
March 9 >

March 8

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 8, 2024.

Big butt disease

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 💬 21:19, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is a reasonable target for Big butt, but, as it does not characterize steatopygia in medical terms, redirecting "Big butt disease" here seems misleading. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While lipedema could potentially result in something similar to this, as exemplified by the picture in the article, it's not confined to the buttocks. In any case, I refuse to consider simply having a big butt to be a disease. And if you object to that, might I request you take a look at this dissertation by the famed professor, Sir Mix-A-Lot? /j Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 13:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As stated above, steatopygia is not the appropriate target for this, given that steatopygia is not a disease (even though the Free Dictionary redirects 'Big Butt Syndrome' to it [1]). When I search "big butt disease", I get information about dead butt syndrome (gluteus medius tendinopathy or gluteal amnesia [www.healthline.com/health/dead-butt-syndrome]), though that doesn't have an article right now. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:44, 15 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).

Agua oxigenada

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 💬 21:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This Spanish term for hydrogen peroxide, which literally translates as 'oxygenated water', is not mentioned in the article. Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. PleaseStand (talk) 21:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Borrar (Spanish for Delete) as per WP:RLANG. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:03, 9 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).

Sitorai Mohi xossa (qarorgoh)

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 21:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely combination of name, capitalization, and disambiguator (I believe it means something like "residence"). Page was at this title for around a minute. Rusalkii (talk) 21:15, 8 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).

Infinite growth

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. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 00:24, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The current target is clearly not plausible (in fact this one was even R3'd), but I feel like there might be something more to this. We don't have an article on Mathematical growth (that one was AfD'd), but we do have an article on Exponential growth (especially a section Exponential growth#Limitations of models, which sort of describes how things can't grow exponentially forever). There are many other other mentions of this phrase in mainspace, though clearly few of them would make good targets. Any thoughts? Duckmather (talk) 21:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't considered the mathematical meaning when I made it. Maybe it could be a disambiguation page that suggests a few economic and math links? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 22:10, 8 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).

Les escargots

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 Snails as food. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 19:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General French translation of snails, and the related work has 2 possible redirects, René Laloux and Roland Topor. As such, doesn't seem like any sensible redirects, or just redirect to Snail as a ((R from alternative language)). Joseph2302 (talk) 17:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Snails as food, which is where Escargot goes. It's perhaps the only place where escargot, the French word for snail, gets past WP:RLANG. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 18:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine by me. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Snails as food per above --Lenticel (talk) 10:33, 10 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).

Thoodhu Poo Chellakiliye

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. CSD G7 Liz Read! Talk! 23:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling mistake, created accidentally. Does G7 apply? Kailash29792 (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kailash29792: Yes it does, since you're the author. I've now tagged it accordingly. CycloneYoris talk! 22:50, 8 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).

Phoebe in fiction

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 Phoebe (given name)#Fictional characters. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 19:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was originally created as a redirect to Saturn's moons in fiction#Phoebe, which did in fact have... exactly one entry, an unsourced mention of the Expanse series by James S. A. Corey. That lack of sources ended up being the downfall of the original target page, as it ended up merged into Saturn in fiction-- becoming a far smaller section compared to the comparatively-large-but-unsourced original article. 'Phoebe in fiction', in turn, was automatically-by-bot retargeted as an untagged ((avoided double redirect)). (Has EmausBot been updated to use that tag, yet?)
The issue now, of course, is that because the entry 'Phoebe in fiction' linked to was unsourced, it wasn't added to Saturn in fiction... which now means that Phoebe isn't currently mentioned at the target.
That said, there's other issues too- foremost, that Phoebe is... wael, a name that a human could easily have. With nothing to disambiguate here, this page could easily be referring to anyone from Phoebe_(given_name)#Fictional_characters.
...Actually y'know what, that's not a half bad retarget... Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 18:49, 8 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).

駒

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 💬 08:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be deleted; unlikely search term with confusing result. The appropriate destination page would actually be wikt:駒#Japanese. asilvering (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:RLANG. That said, I'd like to note that the current target, as per wikt:駒#Japanese, IS the kun'yomi reading of this kanji, so it's not THAT confusing. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lunamann no, it's still very confusing - since almost everyone who uses the 駒 character is not a reader of Japanese. Moreover, most of the senses that use the Japanese reading "koma" (eg, a shogi pawn) are not present on that dab page. -- asilvering (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, completely fair. Changing my vote to... wait, my vote was already Delete, lol. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:53, 11 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).

Misspelled metro stations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 16#Misspelled metro stations

Fairplay (2023 film)

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 Fair Play (2023 film). Jay 💬 08:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe was only at this title as a draft. Given the existence of Fair Play (2023 film) , seems rather confusing. Rusalkii (talk) 07:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Retarget to Fair Play (2023 film). I'm not entirely certain which should happen, but I'm certain that one of the two should happen. (Should the two films have hatnotes to each other??) Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 07:42, 8 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).

Non-existent metro line and stations in Kolkata

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 16#Non-existent metro line and stations in Kolkata

Rivian A16

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 09:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Rivian A16 is a fictional vehicle created independently by a Behance user and there is no (and shouldn't be any) mention of this within the Rivian article. Waddles 🗩 🖉 03:50, 8 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).

MOS:COMPUTING and related

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 Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Computer science. Jay 💬 08:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to WP:Manual of Style/Computer science, which has been through the WP:PROPOSAL process and community-accepted as a ((Guideline)). We have no need for useful and intuitive shortcuts like these to continue to redirect to a ((Failed)) proposal from years ago.

However, various other redirs to the failed proposal should not be retargeted to the guideline, in cases where it lacks a corresponding section or other appropriate link target; these are: MOS:CLI, MOS:COMM, WP:MOSCOMM, WP:Manual of Style/Command-line examples, WP:Manual of Style (command-line examples) & WP:Manual of Style/(command-line examples); MOS:LINUX & MOS:Linux; MOS:WEBADDR; MOS:X86, MOS:x86 & MOS:IA-32; and WP:COMPNOW. They might simply be deletable as unnecessary (and keeping unneeded "MOS:FOO" shortcuts is undesirable because that pseudo-namespace lives in mainspace), but that should probably be a separate RfD). PS: I created a WP:MOSCOMPOLD shortcut for the failed-proposal page (without an unneeded MOS:COMPOLD), and stopped "advertising" other shortcuts on it.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all as per nom. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 02:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, makes sense. It's worth noting that Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Computing) was the original name of the proposal and many of the other redirects have been used in discussions, so retargeting them will break some links. But that probably doesn't matter this long after the discussions took place. MClay1 (talk) 05:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I know. For the most part, it's going to be better to send people to the guideline page than the failed proposal; most editors aren't "wikihistorians" looking into ideas that didn't gain consensus, but are more apt to be looking for the current material. That said, it would not hurt to put a hatnote atop the current guideline that links to the old proposal just in case.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:48, 8 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).
More