Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 8

April 8

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 8, 2020.

Ganga flim(1965)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ganga flim(1965) → Ganga (1965 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Malformed disambiguation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Johann Sebastian Bach/Biography

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SHould it point where it points now or to the “Live” section of it? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC) 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment is this a legacy redirect? Is there any value for this? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirect as it is now, i.e. without deep link. There is no "Live" section in the article, so I suspect Johann Sebastian Bach#Life is meant. Since that is the first section of the article, the question boils down to: should the redirect skip the intro, infobox and TOC? I'd rather say no: that part of the article has biographical content too, and the main article under the composer's name is nowadays considered to be a biographical article anyhow, so doesn't make much sense to skip to the first section imho. --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of Bionicle characters

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 22:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • List of Bionicle characters → Bionicle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no list of characters at the target page, so the title is misleading Utopes (talk / cont) 21:21, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This was deleted on 12 March as a result of a deletion discussion, then brought back as a redirect on 22 March. As the nominator says, the redirect is pointless because there is no list of characters at the target page. JIP | Talk 21:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom - Poydoo is good at talking and editing 23:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It was a nonindenticative redirect. «“I'm Aya Syameimaru!”I„文々。新聞“I„userbako”» 00:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom. --Lenticel (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per AFD consensus. Should not be a redirect since the main article does not have such a list. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - No such list exists. And, honestly, no such list should exist here. The series itself is notable, but minor characters within the franchise are not. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Niteclubs in London

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 22:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Typo and an unlikely search term. Niteclub isn't an article, and there are no redirects from mainspace to category space for lists of night clubs. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Saying "nite" instead of "night" is something that I've seen many times, but I've yet to come across one single reliable source using the term "niteclub". It appears to be a bit of obscure slang without any particular context. Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there is not even Nightclubs in London AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I've only ever seen "Niteclub" as part of a proper name. It isn't an accepted variant spelling of "nightclub". Narky Blert (talk) 10:34, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:RPURPOSE: Redirects from list articles to categories are highly discouraged. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:14, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

ℛ

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 22:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • ℛ → R  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget this to Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols or a section of it. The article does not mention the symbol while the article about the Unicode block explains a bit more about the whole set. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 25#ℛ. Pinging participants in that discussion: @D.Lazard, BDD, Ivanvector, Arms & Hearts, Amory, and Tavix:. Thryduulf (talk) 10:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Thryduulf: A readerwho sees the character as a box
  • Keep per previous consensus. Moreoveer the proposed retargeting is confusing, as either a user searches for a mathematical meaning (none is standard), and an Unicode article is not convenient, or he searches for Unicode information, and he would probably search directly in Unicode articles. D.Lazard (talk) 11:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If kept it should be added to R#Related characters. It it doesn't belong there, the redirect target isn't correct. Peter James (talk) 11:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Thryduulf and D.Lazard: If a reader stumbles over a symbol not displayed on his computer, he will be very confused if he gets redirected to a page about a letter, where a page search doesn't even find that character. On the other hand, I can't think of any other reason for a reader to search up such a symbol. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:30, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per previous nom (which retargeted this from Riemann integral). Unlike ℝ, this has more than one possible meaning and no standard ones. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as per previous. Still makes the most sense to me, and unconvinced the proposed option is better (seem likely to result in more confusion). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:18, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Amorymeltzer: Can you elaborate? Why does it make sense to be redirected to an article about a letter when you want to know what a symbol not displayed on your device means? Also, as I said, surely no-one would type this symbol in if they are looking for the article about R. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nothing has changed since the previous discussion, and I find all those arguments to be quite meritorious, in particular IV's. I'll add that I think your argument here doesn't support your suggestion: if there's a symbol a device can't display, I would think "Hey this is an R" would be loads better than "Here's a page with a bunch of weird characters your device also can't display." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amorymeltzer (talk • contribs) 17:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Queen for a Day (album)

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 22:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Queen for a Day (album) → Anouk (singer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Fake It Till We Die → Anouk (singer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Wen d'r maar aan → Anouk (singer)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Deletion, the redirects make no sense as they are simply linking back to the page they are on, something which I consider highly frustrating. The album pages don't exist so either don't link to it or show a link to a non-existing page. With the current redirects you either open the page in the current window, to find yourselfat the top of the current page again, forcing you to scroll down to where you were, or you open multiple albums in different tabs and when you get to look at them you have the same page open multiple times. None of the pages have a history so no info is lost by deleting them. Forage (talk) 09:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all; tagging as {{R from album}} and unlinking in the targets per WP:SELFRED. Narky Blert (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all, tag and unlink per Narky Blert. Thryduulf (talk) 10:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a reason some albums redirect to the singer and others redirect to the discography? Peter James (talk) 12:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; these redirects serve a purpose. ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget the top two to the discography page, and keep the third one. The discography gives more info about the albums than the artist's page. Hog Farm (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to allow consideration of Hog Farm's retargeting suggestion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: None of these redirects were tagged with {{Rfd}} until today (when I tagged them). Steel1943 (talk) 21:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. Linked on the target article is really not a valid reason for deletion. Just unlink them on the target article. Ss112 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all {{r from album}} is a valid redirect. I'm confused as to why we would delete. >Maybe delete the third one Can we confirm the proper name of the album? Anouk (singer) has a different title. The text was wrong before and evidently no one caught it until I pointed it out below; it has since been fixed. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Anouk (singer) does not have a different title. It clearly says Wen d'r maar aan on the article. Ss112 23:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see the article (emphasis added): "In 2018 Anouk released her first Dutch-language-album; Wen er maar aan." They are clearly different titles. Again, please confirm the actual title and have a redirect for that and don't have a redirect for some misspelling or whatever the other name is. I suggest you read Anouk (singer). ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I have confirmed the name of the album (if you'd bothered to search the album, you would have seen it is correct), and my redirect is not the misspelling. The prose is a misspelling; I didn't add it and I have corrected it. If you thought it was, perhaps you shouldn't have created a talk page for a misspelling. Thanks. Ss112 02:34, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for looking at the article and fixing the incorrect text that I noted before. I can't fix every error here but sometimes, I can point out existing errors. When someone deletes an incorrect redirect, he can easily include deleting the talk page at the same time. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:31, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mastio and Bergfrit

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 Mastio, retarget Bergfrit. signed, Rosguill talk 22:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mastio → Keep  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Bergfrit → Keep  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Mastio" (Tuscan Italian) and "Bergfrit" (Czech) mean "Keep" but this redirect should be deleted because the terms are not mentioned in the article; per Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English; and because they actively inhibit the use of Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are occasionally used in English, to describe things in the countries where those languages are used. If there are other uses, disambiguation pages can be created. There are articles that link to these redirects. Peter James (talk) 09:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No, sorry, just wanted to say that. Delete really. JIP | Talk 21:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Groan. Narky Blert (talk) 10:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:17, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. These could be used as future stub articles, branding, media titles, or disambiguations. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:32, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFFL; noting also that neither word equates to "keep". it:Mastio has no equivalent in any other language, and cs:Bergfrit equates to Bergfried, which is not the same thing as a "keep". Narky Blert (talk) 10:41, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't keep all, delete them per nom. --Soumyabrata stay at home wash your hands to protect from coronavirus 14:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete masito and retarget bergfrit to bergfried per NB. Czechia was certainly under heavy German influence so it should be kept per WP:RFFL: "Manifestations of culture with special significance in areas where that language is spoken". buidhe 03:24, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Rahmanism

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 22:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rahmanism → Rahmanan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I support this page to be redirected to A. R. Rahman instead of Rahmanan. When you check Google or WP:RS this is the majority of the results lead to. Or it should be a disambiguation page for both. - The9Man (Talk) 06:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Sources in Google search are mostly not reliable. The9Man, you need to provide sources for your claim. Don't ask us to find sources. Rahmanism is used in reliable sources to reference an unknown monotheist religion that appeared in ancient Yemen. (It is often said that it is influenced by Judaism or that it is Hanifism.)
    • One is that "Rahmanism" in South Arabia is identical with what is called Hanifism [1]
    • South Arabian monotheism (rahmanism) By the second half of the 4th century AD the polytheistic formulae and names of the deities of South Arabian pantheon started to disappear from the ancient texts. [2]
    • L'Oriente Christ (Rome, 1964), 439, maintained that the "Rahmanism" of the fifth century was neither Jewish nor influenced by Judaism. [3]
    • A view which has been much canvassed is that 4th-5th century Rahmanism was the Jewish faith l40).[4]
    • Even if Besston is right in drawing a distinction between south Arabian Rahmanism and Judaism, he himself ultimately follows J. Ryckmans and admits that it was a monotheistic religion, strongly influenced by Judaism.[5]--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 06:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Apart from his name, what does A. R. Rahman have to do with Rahmanism? - Poydoo can talk and edit 23:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this is a bit confusing as not all the sources presented here are connecting it to Rahmanan and it might be more suited to Rahman (disambiguation) or its own article. If you want to keep it, you should talk about Rahmanism in detail in the article and then hatnote to the disambiguation page in case people are looking for Rahman in general. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:39, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes they are connected. Rahmanan is the name of god/God that Rahmanists worshipped.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Rush is right

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. Slight numeric superiority for keep, but they're all weak votes. signed, Rosguill talk 22:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rush is right → Rush Limbaugh  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not clear what the purpose of this redirect is. Appears unnecessary to me - possibly someone trying to make a political message. – numbermaniac 03:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Correct or conservative? Either is opinion. Narky Blert (talk) 09:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - No mention in article. However: It appears to be slogan-esque—it appears on merchandise, viewable from a simple google search of the term. {{R from slogan}}, perhaps, if kept. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 22:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - It's a slogan that he uses on some of his official merchandise. I'm not too sure about this one. Yet I lean toward making sure that we don't delete this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep it's an old slogan; is it not mentioned in the article anymore? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • None that I can see in the body of the article. The closest mention is in the References section, where "Rush Is Always Right" is the title of reference 20, and "Rush was Right" is the title of reference 43. However, neither of these exactly match the name of this redirect. – numbermaniac 07:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

China republic

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 China (disambiguation). There is no consensus here but keeping the existing target of China is clearly wrong so picking the most general possible target. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:48, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • China republic → China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should this target China or the Republic of China (Taiwan)? The "republic" is specified, and I think this could go either way. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to China (disambiguation) And this is a different term from Republican China, which correctly redirects to Republic of China (1912–1949) (when the ROC was still governing the mainland). CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 17:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to the DAB page. It's ambiguous. Narky Blert (talk) 08:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist to try to get a clearer consensus on which dab page to point to, China (disambiguation) or Republic of China (disambiguation)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Republic of China Taiwan as the official name of Taiwan is "Republic of China". The bigger and more famous China is called the People's Republic of China. JIP | Talk 21:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The SImpsons

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 22:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The SImpsons → The Simpsons  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bizarre and unlikely capitalization. TheAwesomeHwyh 16:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unnecessary clutter. Narky Blert (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Definitely more helpful than it is harmful. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 21:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unnecessary, especially given that Wikipedia's search function automatically directs the reader to the best applicable capitalization mismatched page whenever a page with the exact capitalization they typed does not exist. (For example, try typing "ChEeSe" in the search function, and notice how it brings the reader to Cheese without first going to any other redirect such as CHEESE.) And since linking to this redirect has no utility in the article namespace, along with the aforementioned functionality of Wikipedia's search function, this redirect serves next-to-no value. Steel1943 (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This sort of redirect is for the people who use the URL as an internal search function. Quite simply, I don't see the point in deleting this. I do have a question though: Does searching up, say, CHEESE before being automatically directed to Cheese count as a pageview for CHEESE? — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 22:47, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • @J947: It came to my attention that I never answered this inquiry. But yes, searching CHEESE (when auto redirected) would count as a page view for CHEESE and Cheese. (And yes, I see that Thryduulf explained this below as well, so me saying all of this is obviously redundant, but it is what it is.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for the response (eventually) :). — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 19:45, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • AIUI simply appearing in search results does not count as a view but clicking on the redirect definitely does count as a view. Whether previewing a redirect using popups or something similar counts as a view I don't know - it's not something I've ever thought about before. Thryduulf (talk) 10:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I want to make sure I am clear on what I meant since I'm not sure if it was misinterpreted or not. So, regarding the "ChEeSe" example above: I meant that if "ChEeSe" is typed in and then "Enter" is pressed on the keyboard without clicking on any of the auto populated results, the reader goes straight to Cheese without first hitting any redirects. However, I found there is more to how the search works in such a scenario: Apparently, the search will retrieve the most accurate word-case title when the search term used is a capitalization mismatch. A few minutes ago, I attempted to search "NaSa" and press enter, the search function did not retrieve NASA, but rather Nasa (a redirect to NASA) probably for the simple fact that Nasa exists. Steel1943 (talk) 18:01, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        ...And I just attempted to look up "THe SimPsoNS" and the page which was retrieved was The simpsons (a redirect to The Simpsons). So, it seems that if the capitalization mismatched search term doesn't exist, the search function retrieves the respective title that has only the first letter capitalized. At this point, I'd like to see an example of an article page with more than one capital letter in its title and see if I can test something when the respective title with only the first letter capitalized doesn't exist ... the results may provide more answers. Steel1943 (talk) 18:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        ...And I just tested the former idea in my own user space. I have a subpage in my user space named User:Steel1943/Project redirects, so I attempted to see what would happen if I searched "User:StEel1943/PrOjeCt redIRects" and press enter, and it brought me immediately to User:Steel1943/Project redirects instead of the nonexistent User:Steel1943/project redirects (notice the lowercase "p" in "projects") since for the most likely reason being that User:Steel1943/project redirects doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 18:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Weirdly enough, it just landed me on a there is no page page when I tried that with User:J947/sandbox/A. It still auto-redirects for say, chEEsE. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 19:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • Oh, that happened because I searched up User:J947/SaNDBox/a when I was already at User:J947/sandbox/A. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 19:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thryduulf, I didn't mean simply appearing in search results but rather pressing ↵ Enter for a varied capitalisation as Steel described above. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 18:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • @J947: if you go to an article via a redirect then both redirect and article pages views get incremented by 1, if you don't go via a redirect then only the target article gets the view. e.g. Steel will have given Nasa a page view today), but wont have contributed anything to the figures of redirects to Cheese. However, the closest available capitalisation 'trick' (for want of a better term) only works when using some case-insensitive search methods. If you use a case sensitive method (e.g. direct url entry, following a link, etc) then you will be taken to the title that exactly matches (bar the first letter) the case you entered. Many people use case sensitive methods to find Wikipedia content. Thryduulf (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • Okay, good to know some more about this. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 19:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I just don't think that it's really useful. Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per CoffeeWithMarkets, not an initialization or stylization either. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:41, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • DElete per long-standing precedent for this type of capitalization. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Steel1943, Pointless and useless. –Davey2010Talk 14:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

John carlton

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 John Carlton. (non-admin closure) buidhe 03:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • John carlton → Johnny Cage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to John Carlton. Not sure what the creator of the redirect meant. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Unit redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 15#Unit redirects

Planck redirects

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 22:08, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target pages Utopes (talk / cont) 20:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all – these are not terms that would occur in the real world, are exceedingly unlikely as search terms, and are not anything we would have anything on as a target for the redirect anyway. —Quondum 20:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Definitely delete the latter two. I could maybe, maybe see a case for keeping the first one, since Planck's constant is a unit of action (energy × time), as the target text explains. But I don't really think people search for "Planck action" instead of "Planck's constant". XOR'easter (talk) 22:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Rough sex

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, but where? This is no longer just a pornography term. The term is used for example in this BBC article about a current affairs programme on people using such techniques in their private lives [6], while for example you wouldn't say "hardcore sex" for anything outside of porn. It's also been mentioned in articles about murder defences, most visibly around the Murder of Grace Millane, as something in real life. [7] This is a sexual practice documented as happening with large amount of people who are not in pornography. Really, this should redirect to either an article about consensual sexual violence, or an article about the controversial murder defence. Do any such articles exist? That would be much less astonishing than a link to just the page about porn, which may or may not include such techniques Wallachia Wallonia (talk) 20:13, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Honestly, I can't think of anywhere to retarget this that feels really appropriate. BDSM related articles refer to specific practices that are far narrower than the general term 'rough sex'. I'm inclined to see deletion as the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:13, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. In this case, I think Search serves the reader better (notwithstanding a couple of not notable songs). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per OP, not a porn-only term. — Bilorv (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've started a stub at rough sex murder defense, so disambiguation is a possibility. buidhe 03:46, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we still don't have any article that is a clear match for this target, and the possible alternatives suggested are much narrower in scope to the point that disambiguation is jumping the gun. signed, Rosguill talk 22:08, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

2019-20 Coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak

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 withdrawn (non-admin closure). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's the second result in the search bar, but with its redundancy it is otherwise an implausible search term. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:06, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mark Burnett (disambiguation2)

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. by Anthony Appleyard (non-admin closure) 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:11, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mark Burnett (disambiguation2) → Mark Burnett  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Spring Garden station (disambiguation2) → Spring Garden station  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Errors in the act of disambiguating (see WP:RDAB). The qualifier has a stray digit and the target is not a disambiguation page. A valid dab Mark Burnett (disambiguation) exists. Certes (talk) 19:30, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so does Spring Garden station (disambiguation2), which I'm adding here. Regards, SONIC678 20:21, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Adam Sutherland

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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:47, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or replace with a disambiguation page. There appear to be two decently well-known musicians by this name, a Scottish fiddler and a Canadian alt-rock musician. Both have 2 incoming links to this redirect. That this points to the record label of the rock musician's band (with no direct mention of the musician on that page) is confusing. Simply deleting could lead to more future confusion between these people. However creating a disambiguation page for two people, neither of whom currently have their own article, may also not be ideal. Open to discussion on the best course of action. Kronhjorten (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. I've added a draft. It's unusual for a DAB page to have no full-title-match bluelinks, but it's not unheard of; it can be justified by WP:DABMENTION. IMO there's a chance that both the curator and the fiddler might just about pass WP:GNG. I couldn't find enough about the Canadian musician, or the fictional character in The King's Messengers (quaintly described as "British Royal Ambassador"), or the corporate executive with Iowa Interstate Railroad to justify including them. Narky Blert (talk) 21:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate, thanks Narky. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:17, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Khmer Empire (disamubigation)

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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Khmer Empire (disamubigation) → Khmer Empire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Errors in the act of disambiguating (see WP:RDAB). The qualifier is misspelt, the term is unambiguous, and the target is not a disambiguation page. Brought here as it has a previous Speedy Deletion attempt. Certes (talk) 18:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – RDAB (part of an essay) does not apply as this page would never cause an INTDAB error. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 20:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as we don't need redirects for misspelt disambiguators (and that's what WP:RDAB is about; it has nothing to do with WP:INTDAB). – Uanfala (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:G14 even without the misspelling and per WP:G6 with it. I'm astonished that the WP:CSD request in 2010 was declined. A link to this redirect would indeed not cause a WP:INTDAB error, because the target is not a DAB page. Narky Blert (talk) 21:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Agathoclea (talk) 09:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:18, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This appears to be a clear-cut case. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Planck electric potential

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Planck electric potential → SI derived unit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 17:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Planck units. It's certainly a valid quantity (though I don't ever recall specifically seeing it used), and it's one of the many units listed there that don't have an independent page. ~ mazca talk 18:22, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    There's a significant edit war going on with, by the look of it, a lot of original research being added including this unit, hence why it was there when I made this post, and not there when Utopes did below. This and other RfDs seem somewhat secondary to the consensus at that page; if these are no longer included there, the redirects also seem surplus to requirements. ~ mazca talk 21:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It is not listed at the page, and there is no current suitable target for the redirect. Just because the subject exists does not mean that a redirect should also exist. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – This is not a term that would occur in the real world. It does not make sense to retain it. —Quondum 20:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not actually a scientific term in use. XOR'easter (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Pedal-cart

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 15#Pedal-cart

Tesla-metre

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 SI derived unit#Examples of derived quantities and units. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tesla-metre → Magnetic potential  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:25, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I presume this refers to a meter that measures magnetic flux density. Perhaps it should redirect to Magnetometer. Constant314 (talk) 17:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider retargetting to Rigidity (electromagnetism). The derived SI unit for this property is the tesla-metre. Certes (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Certes. This cannot be an instrument, the spelling of "meter" is wrong in every version of English I know of. It appears to be a combined unit, tesla-metre, and Certes has indicated what it measures. Narky Blert (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment "meter" is a device for metering, a measurment device, such as used in our article Water metering, where "water meters" measure water. It is also U.S. English; thus a Tesla meter could be a device that measures in Teslas. Or it could be a device for measuring the quantity, regardless of unit used, such as an ammeter or voltmeter -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Retarget per Certes, due to the name of the unit. But also add a hatnote to the measurement device --- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 16:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • ...but a Tesla metre can't be a device, because metre with R before E never means a measuring device. Certes (talk) 17:01, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to SI derived unit – A unit name should never redirect to a quantity, so I disagree (with the new target suggested by Certes). A suitable target would be SI derived unit. —Quondum 21:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update – we have now got two entirely different quantities with the same units (and I would be unsurprised to find more). Hence, retargeting to any quantity or even a DAB page for quantities is inappropriate, and my suggested target becomes the only reasonable one. —Quondum 01:15, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment See also #Unit redirects above. Certes (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The target page is now a dab page. One of the disambiguated terms at the target, magnetic vector potential, does indeed have units of Tesla-metre in the SI system, although the article doesn't say so. SpinningSpark 23:12, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Orders of magnitude redirects

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:52, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orders of magnitude (angular speed) → Angular velocity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (magnetic potential) → Magnetic potential  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (electric potential) → Electric potential  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (action) → Action (physics)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (radiance) → Radiance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (specific charge) → Mass-to-charge ratio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Orders of magnitude (absolute hardness) → Hardness#Rebound hardness  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Another batch of "orders of magnitude" redirects that are not mentioned at the target. I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment; I have gone ahead and merged two similar discussions about "orders of magnitude" redirects before there was any !votes. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all – these are candidates for list-type articles (or as sections of such articles), but not as redirects until they have valid targets on WP. Hence, delete. —Quondum 22:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all The target articles do not tabulate these quantities by order of magnitude (and in many cases it's hard to see why they would). XOR'easter (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

מקדונלד'ס

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 22:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion, not every American company with Israeli branch requires a Hebrew redirection. I live in Israel, there is no difference between this one and אפל, גוגל. Uziel302 (talk) 22:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Narky Blert (talk) 04:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:RFOREIGN. This is a relevant language to the article and is used multiple times therein. I agree that "not every American company with Israeli branch requires a Hebrew redirection", but very few American companies with Israeli branches have a separate article about said branch. -- Tavix (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Classic reason to keep per WP:FORRED. Steel1943 (talk) 19:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FORRED. --Soumyabrata stay at home wash your hands to protect from coronavirus 06:50, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per RLOTE. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 02:09, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – I have tagged the redirect. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 02:13, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The redirect wasn't tagged until today. (WP:INVOLVED relist due to the fact that the instructions require the redirect be tagged for the 7-day period as well, and a relist allows that.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Explicit sex

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 16#Explicit sex

Big Bird, TX

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 22:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Big Bird, TX → Chupacabra  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Big Bird, Texas → Chupacabra  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Big Bird" is not mentioned at the target article. Delete unless justification can be provided. Hog Farm (talk) 20:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment these originally redirected to Big Bird (cryptid) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), until it was vandalized into being a redirect to Chupacabra, whereby a bot compounded that by "fixing" a double redirect. However, the target article itself was later redirected to a list article, which does not contain a "Big Bird" anymore... so perhaps you should also bundle in Big Bird (cryptid) ? -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 03:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Restore article I do not suspect vandalism, but Jeepday (talk · contribs) was wrong to redirect this to Chupacabra. The subjects are clearly different. No prejudice to AfD, if appropriate. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Nonetheless, the redirects have ill-chosen disambiguators (the subject was not a populated place) and should be deleted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The edit history is messy. Both these redirects originally pointed to Big Bird (cryptid). They wound up pointing to Chupacabra as double redirects, after that page was blanked and redirected there. Big Bird (cryptid) was subsequently redirected to List of cryptids; which does not mention it.
Bundle Big Bird (cryptid) into this nomination. It was blanked and redirected in 2007. That article was never sourced, and carried a strong stench of WP:HOAX - see the article at its most developed, in September 2007. Narky Blert (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as hoax. Seriously? Bert and Ernie? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Has either of them ever lied to you before? Narky Blert (talk) 10:52, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

John Avery (soccer player)

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 22:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • John Avery (soccer player) → Avery John  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These redirects are either misspelled or incorrect, so I hope they get deleted. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 14:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. #1 - there is no footballer called John Avery, just Avery John. #2 has a badly wrong birthyear. #3 is misspelt, and ambiguous; the correctly-spelled Da Silva (footballer) exists. Narky Blert (talk) 19:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not needed. GiantSnowman 07:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, exactly per Narky. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

No-deal Brexit (redirects)

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 22:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No-deal Brexit (redirects) → No-deal Brexit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't understand the history of this redirect, but it seems unnecessary. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 14:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Highly unusually qualifier. Hog Farm (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Pointless. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:10, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Pointless and nonsensical. –Davey2010Talk 17:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Weird. It may be a remnant of a WP:ROBIN move or something. Narky Blert (talk) 19:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This appears to be the result of a move by Anthony Appleyard: maybe he intended to preserve a redirect's history at this title? – Uanfala (talk) 20:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • See this discussion too. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 20:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree. This looks like a clear-cut case. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This accumulation of old redirects was in the way of a requested page move, so I moved them aside out of the way. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per Anthony Appleyard. Had meaning when was named No-deal Brexit but since that became an article via a page move of another page no longer has relevance under the new name.Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

UFC Ultimate Fight Night

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 15#UFC Ultimate Fight Night

(a)fternoon EP

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 15#(a)fternoon EP

(*)

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 22:00, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (*) → Asterisk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A reader searching for an asterisk will certainly not put it in brackets. Better leave him with the search results. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Originally redirected to Beta XII-A entity, a minor Star Trek character, but someone changed the target to asterisk twelve and a half years ago without explanation. The character is not notable enough to have an article, an entry in a list will suffice, and there are no incoming links to (*). JIP | Talk 13:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I find the nominator's argument to be totally persuasive. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dolly (The Amazing World of Gumball)

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 07:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Dolly" is not mentioned at List of The Amazing World of Gumball characters or the main article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:56, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. A search on the TV show's wiki reveals that this was Sarah's original name according to her character models (as seen on her page on the wiki). However, I don't really think many people will know this production trivia. Regards, SONIC678 06:27, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed an invalid link. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete working character names prior to the show don't require a redirect. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:49, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Be Your Own You

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 07:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in any Gumball-related article. Purportedly a song from the show. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - This doesn't seem to have any particular notability. The song appeared in one episode, and that's it... I think. I don't regularly watch the show, so I'm not positive about that fact. Still, deletion appears to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's a song from "The Copycats". We have plenty of other redirects from songs; not sure why this one should be deleted. Raymond1922 (talk) 17:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This appeared briefly in one episode, and it was made explicitly for comedic purposes in terms of a show that's not centered around music per se. It's a different level of notability than looking at a professionally released song created by a musical artist meant to be taken seriously. As well, the page being targeted doesn't appear to even mention the song at all. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Le Monde Incroyable de Gumball

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 07:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An English-language program from an English-speaking country (not USA, as you may think). Fails WP:FORRED. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - This appears to be a clear-cut case. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFFL. fr:Le Monde incroyable de Gumball does not suggest any particular Francophone connection. Ben Bocquelet, the creator, is Franco-British, but neither that biography nor fr:Ben Bocquelet says that he has worked on anything other than English-language productions Narky Blert (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:50, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dated artist to label redirects

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 07:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in the target. No other mention anywhere else. Another batch of dated redirects created by Zawl. Jalen Folf (talk) 03:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. Not mentioned in the target, therefore useless. No prejudice against recreation of any of these Armada Music redirects if anyone feels like adding them to the target with a WP:V source such as the Armada website.
How many more redirects like this by site-banned User:Zawl are there? Narky Blert (talk)
  • Delete all. Not mentioned in the target, per nomination. PKT(alk) 17:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Only $1.00

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 07:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only $1.00 → Dollar Tree  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous and can refer to many topics. Dollar Tree isn't the only dollar store. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There must've been an error with the dollar sign. The links are fixed. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment If the primary topic is the price point, it should be retargetted to Variety store] (where Dollar store redirects). Thryduulf (talk) 10:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Only $1.00 is the former name of Dollar Tree, which is why it redirects to it and not other dollar stores. Poydoo (talk) 17:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in light of new information.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 02:30, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As stated above, the "Only $1.00" moniker used to be the name of the company until a 90s corporate shake-up. We shouldn't delete this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Former corporate name, that makes current target the primary topic. Hog Farm (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of rugby union players banned for contact with eyes or the eye area of an an opponent

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 07:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • List of rugby union players banned for contact with eyes or the eye area of an an opponent → Eye-gouging (rugby union)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This seems like an unlikely search term with the repeated "an," because of which it was moved to the correct-grammar version back in 2010 (and this redirect was left over). Regards, SONIC678 01:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - This appears useless. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are there any other redirects with "an an" that we can bundle with this? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I couldn't find any, everything else looks OK. Narky Blert (talk) 10:15, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This was the original title of the page based upon the official IRB definition of the illegal action. It was moved from that to the current title to become shorthand for that, even though it the current title technically inaccurate under the laws of rugby. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The one you mean still exist as a redirect - List of rugby union players banned for contact with eyes or the eye area of an opponent. This one under discussion simply has a duplicated "an". Hzh (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I see no point in keeping a title with a duplicated "an". Useless to keep one with an error. Hzh (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as as unnecessary clutter. The correctly-named redirect with only one one "an" exists. Narky Blert (talk) 23:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unambiguous error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Thodi Khushi Thode Gham(some happiness some sadness)

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 07:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thodi Khushi Thode Gham(some happiness some sadness) → Thodi Khushi Thode Gham  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Back in 2007, this redirect was left over when its target page was moved to its current title. While "some happiness some sadness" is the English title of this TV show (and thus a possibly plausible search term), and people might search the title and translation together, I don't know about searching without a space in between the title and the translation... Regards, SONIC678 01:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep per K4; this causes no harm. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 04:03, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that it can be reasonably argued that this has some harm since it interferes with search results. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @CoffeeWithMarkets: Why is it harmful for the reader to be given more space to click on Thodi Khushi Thode Gham when that is the likely result of the reader's search? Also, please read and follow MOS:LISTGAP. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 14:22, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unlikely search term with a spacing issue between the initial title and the de facto disambiguator. Steel1943 (talk) 18:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree. Given the spacing issue, this appears unhelpful. We shouldn't keep it. 21:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC) CoffeeWithMarkets (talk)
  • Delete. Not only is there a missing space, but the disambiguator should be in WP:TITLECASE. Narky Blert (talk) 23:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unnecessary and erroneous disambiguation. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Teenager animation

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 07:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Teenager animation → Animated sitcom  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure why this redirects here, since animation aimed at teenagers isn't all sitcoms, and people might be looking for adult animation or similar. I'm leaning towards maybe retargeting this, unless a justification can be provided for why it should redirect here. Regards, SONIC678 01:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - "Animation directed at teenagers" isn't really a concept that I think has been explored by reliable sources. Broadly speaking, there's material for families and general audiences, material for children, and material for adults... it's not as if marketing to teenagers isn't a thing, but programming set-ups? I'm not sure. I'm inclined to think that we simply get rid of this redirect. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Teen film. Narky Blert (talk) 10:18, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as I don't see a plausible title about how to animate teenagers. Also, I don't think that Teen film is an intended target since 1) the target is not exclusively about animation and 2) the redirect is not clear if the subject is about teenage characters in animation, teenagers creating animation, or animation projects directed for a teenage audience. Steel1943 (talk) 18:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as confusing. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

National Geographic (Africa)

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 National Geographic Global Networks. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of these channels for different parts of the world are discussed on this page. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:48, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

2020 NCAA tournament

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. There is consensus for disambiguation but it is not a trivial effort, so deleting for now as the preferred alternative for most of the participants. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:25, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The NCAA spans more than just men's basketball. We also don't make redirects for 2019 NCAA tournament, 2018 NCAA tournament, 2017 NCAA tournament, 2016 NCAA tournament, etc. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:06, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Ambiguous. Could also refer to the Women's Basketball Tournament, the College World Series, the softball championship, etc. Hog Farm (talk) 23:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to dab or Keep It's a plausible desinatination for some (if not most) readers. Address valid concerns by converting it to a disambiguation page. FYI, there is 2016 NCAA Tournament, 2015 NCAA Tournament, 2014 NCAA Tournament, etc.—Bagumba (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to dab or Delete Since it doesn’t signify basketball it could actually mean any of a number of sports - volleyball, hockey, lacrosse, etc. Either delete this (and the other ones surfaced by Bagumba) or just make them all into DAB pages. Either answer works for me. Rikster2 (talk) 12:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Editors in favor of dab proposals may want to consider drafting the disambiguation below the current deletion notice.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Rosguill: Regarding your relist comment, here are 10 pages that could be listed at a "2020 NCAA tournament" dab.—Bagumba (talk) 09:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or disambiguate per Rikster2. I think it might be best to delete for now, without prejudice to disambiguation whenever someone wants to put one together. --BDD (talk) 14:48, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Progressive Conservative Parrty

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another redirrect with a misspelling whose plausibility is questionable. This seems like more search bar clutter, tilting towards delete here. Regards, SONIC678 03:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The r and t are right beside each other, so I can see someone typing an r trying to type a t, realize they didn't type a t and type a t, and fail to realize the t key didn't work because they actually placed an r. OcelotCreeper (talk) 03:28, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meh; keep. This does no harm and is quite historical too. {{R from misspelling}} and {{R unprintworthy}} both apply. — J947 (user | cont | ess), at 21:55, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unlikely to be used much, and would be noticed as a mistake. Peter James (talk) 09:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Searchbox clutter. Narky Blert (talk) 10:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I don't believe that this is useful. We really shouldn't keep it. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unambiguous error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Republican Corea

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. signed, Rosguill talk 07:53, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Republican Corea → South Korea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely misspelling. TheAwesomeHwyh 03:18, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Corea instead of Korea is weird, but I can see that being a typo, Referring to south korea as republican corea however. OcelotCreeper (talk) 03:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Corea instead of Korea is not weird, just obsolete. See wikt:Corea. Narky Blert (talk) 06:05, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. While "Corea" is used as a spelling for Korea in many different languages (as noted here) and is therefore plausible, "Republican Korea" could also refer to one of the two Democratic Republican Parties of South Korea. Regards, SONIC678 03:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment then shouldn't Republican Korea be turned into a disambiguation page, with this pointing to that? Then you could list both SK political parties, as well as DPRK and ROK (both republics) -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 09:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep perfectly plausible misspelling/alternative spelling so it should point at the same target as Republican Korea, which it currently does. Thryduulf (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget - This should go to 'Republican Korea', and that other article should be turned into a disambiguation page. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Drinking in Fiji

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 15#Drinking in Fiji

Drinking in France

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 redirect to cuisine articles. signed, Rosguill talk 07:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Drinking in France → French wine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
  • Drinking in Italy → Beer in Italy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The possibilities for drinking in France aren't exhausted by wine, and neither are those in Italy limited to beer, of all things. The redirects presuppose the kind of article that we've got for Canada and three or four other countries, but there's nothing comparable for either France or Italy. The section Italian cuisine#Drinks is quite relevant but it doesn't come close either. Anyone bored? Look at the other redirects created by the same editor – Uanfala (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_April_8&oldid=1138582930"