Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 21

August 21

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 21, 2023.

Prince Maurice of Battenberg, KCVO

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. ✗plicit 03:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Implausible search term. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:17, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Tobati–Enggros languages

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 01:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Factually incorrect and misleading, no such language group exists. The creating user made several other hoax-like pages. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 22:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

2023 Ojai earthquake

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 article created. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 21:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Ojai earthquake is not mentioned at the target leading to WP:SURPRISE at the target. TartarTorte 20:34, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Understood given its current form, however I'd like to state my intention to turn this into an actual article today as I believe it may pass notability guidelines. Paradoxsociety 21:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have created a stub article and would like to propose closing this thread. Paradoxsociety 21:34, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

War For Survival

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 7 Escape. Jay 💬 10:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned on this page (or seemingly any page on wikipedia with reference to the show). TartarTorte 20:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Massacres of Albanians in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1918-1945)

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. -- Tavix (talk) 22:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary disambiguator; I'm neutral on creating an equivalent redirect without parentheses: Massacres of Albanians in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, while this one should be deleted either way. –Vipz (talk) 20:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Atrocities against Albanians in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1918-1941)

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. -- Tavix (talk) 22:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary disambiguator; I'm neutral on creating an equivalent redirect without parentheses: Atrocities against Albanians in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, while this one should be deleted either way. –Vipz (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Perry the Platypus?!

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 01:51, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term created by editor blocked for DE. Any pageviews are likely from it popping up as a suggested search term when looking up "Perry the Platypus" ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 20:02, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't even figure out a way to link to the section properly because of the [] in the section name. We'd need to rename the section if we'd want to retarget theere, which makes my vote an even weaker soft retarget. TartarTorte 13:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TartarTorte The target doesn't make sense there since the "?!" is a stylization that could apply to a number of quotes from Doof; that's also notwithstanding the fact that it is very unlikely anyone is searching for this. ~ F4U (talk • they/it) 15:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The redirect is intended as an expression for which we don't have a target, while we have an article for the character whose title is more or less same as the redirect. Jay 💬 12:25, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Vincian

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 soft redirect to Wikt:Vincian. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 13:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent neologism, no sustained use. GnocchiFan (talk) 16:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know why, but an editor has been repeatedly inserting this neologism into articles about queer terminology, including in the lead of Gay men. I'm happy for them if they've found a thing to identify themselves as, but the attempts to swamp/erase "gay man" as a term concern me (also, enough with the neologisms, people, I've had **mumble mumble** decades of neologisms for my queerness and it's getting tiresome). Within Wikipedia's rules, delete as a neologism that is rarely used and only appears in listicles and other non-reliable sources. — Trey Maturin™ 17:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It's a modern term, obviously. But nonetheless it's a reasonable search term. Countless redirects exist without usage reliable sources. I agree with Trey Maturin that it shouldn't be used to erase "gay man", but nobody's requesting a move so I don't see this causing any harm as just a redirect. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My only issue is that I don't think this would be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for someone searching "Vincian"; Leonardo da Vinci was known for a lot more than his disputed sexuality. A quick search on Google shows articles on the da Vincian cardiovascular system, for example.
A lot of the user-generated sources on the Internet will inevitably be skewered towards the sexuality neologism, but there's still no evidence that this is the primary topic for this term, or that the term in relation to sexuality is notable. It's the combination of the two that is the issue for me, and why we should just delete this redirect. – GnocchiFan (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Leonardo da Vinci#Legacy with hatnote, seems like Vincian is being used as an adjective to refer to da Vinci and what he has done.Da Vincian face,da Vincian principles, etc. See wiktionary:Vincian also. --(Roundish ⋆t) 23:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or soft redirect to Wiktionary (wikt:Vincian), similar to how achillean is. Also, the term vincian was originally coined as a term to replace achillean (MLM), which includes bisexual men as well. It's similar to uranian (sexology). MikutoH (talk) 00:14, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

List of deepwater ports

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was deleted back in 2014 at this RfD because not all deep water ports are panamax ports, at least as was the determination of that RfD. I could not find much to show that the two are synonymous, but am not 100% an expert in ports either, so I could be wrong and it's possible things have changed over the past 9 years. TartarTorte 01:43, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reverse redirect. The list does mention this, but Panamax is a bit outdated. I'd rather the article be titled "List of deepwater ports", and have each entry specify which size category corresponds with the given port. The list does list deepwater ports because a port would have to be deep in order to support a Panamax ship. -- Tavix (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "deepwater port" is faaaar too vague. An 18th-century "deepwater port" is a very shallow port nowadays. And ports for post-Panamax-II with needing greater depth of water are not Panamax ports. -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 05:01, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

M City

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. Consensus clearly prefers the DAB for now. In general, people seem to think the drafted DAB is okay, with the one problem being Manchester City; even if that's deleted, though, we still have two matches unless M City Condominiums gets deleted, which is a separate discussion to be had. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 06:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could refer to any city that starts with M; Google search results do not support the current target. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:00, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Eternal death

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) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 18:29, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No mention at target. I suggest deletion. Veverve (talk) 14:34, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eternal Death: {{r from miscapitalisation}}. Support Duckmather's retarget and hatnote. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC) Okay, now I support disambiguate per IP. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:29, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Substratum

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 Substrata. Retargeting and disambiguating are essentially the same, so I went with the former. (non-admin closure) Duckmather (talk) 21:47, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Substratum should be a dab between Substratum (linguistics) and Substratum (geology). Substrata (pl.) is already a similar dab page. Also note the primary concept, Stratum, is the geology concept, instead of Stratum (linguistics). (See also previous discussion.) fgnievinski (talk) 19:43, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate per nom. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:06, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bryce S. Ketchup

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 23:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Subject not mentioned in target article. Additionally searching this name up in quotes on Google gives no results. Colgatepony234 (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Wikipedia:RFD?

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 leaning keep. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 18:33, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I end up at this from time to time when trying to type WP:RFD/T or the like and holding shift while typing / which makes it ?. This redirect seems to be pretty much entirely unused from pageviews and has no links to it from within wikipedia as of nomination. It seems that this could be deleted safely and it would allow those, like myself, who type WP:RFD? to have the search functionality show no page exists as opposed to being confused as to how I ended up at When to delete a redirect on the RfD page. I acknowledge the irony of this not specifically meeting a criterion laid out in WP:RFD#DELETE. TartarTorte 17:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to WP:RFD since that seems to be the closest match. Duckmather (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure it makes sense to send the title with a question mark to the generic meaning when the title of the redirect target section is "When should we delete a redirect" which includes a question mark in the title that said I don't really see a problem with that but I'd otherwise perhaps say delete. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:41, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There are other, more prominent shortcuts that use the question mark, such as WP:FA? and WP:FP?, so that alone shouldn't be reason to delete. However, this one does indeed seem unused. Anyway, don't retarget. And if kept, it should be added to the shortcut box at the target section to avoid confusion. --Paul_012 (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (It already targets WP:RfD, a specific section of it.) The redirect makes sense. The question is simple: When should we WP:RFD? - jc37 16:20, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, "WP:RFD?" seems pretty intuitive / natural to go to a subsection talking that discusses RfD as a question. Like, let's say someone is looking at a redirect in front of them and aren't sure whether they want to RfD it. The question they would ask, essentially, is "RfD?". And that's exactly what they'll get if they search WP:RFD?, which luckily is on the same page as the WP:RFD shortcut itself. I don't think there would be any confusion, as it's all in the same ballpark. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:53, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

LaLiga

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. There was no support for disambiguation, and participants were split over retargeting to the body, and keeping at the current target as the primary topic. Jay 💬 16:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"LaLiga" is the name of the organising body of the Spanish men's first and second divisions, as well as the top woman's division. This can be seen in official documents and promotional releases. The similar naming between the body and the divisions seems to sow confusion, but considering Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional correctly names "LaLiga" as an alternative name it is illogical for it to be a redirect to a different one. LaLiga should either be retargeted to Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional or turned into a disambiguation page. DatGuyTalkContribs 08:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I see your point, but I'm tempted to just keep this as is in spite of it being incorrect – the vast majority of readers searching this up want to access the current target. Not a football fan, but this is the sponsorship name of the league (LaLiga EA Sports), and how the (old?) logo would be read, which for many would be the only time they actually see the league name in writing. J947 † edits 11:52, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems like a perfect place for a disambiguation page then. The logos of LaLiga and the two divisions are all very similar. DatGuyTalkContribs 12:28, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Organising body
    Organising body
  • First division
    First division
  • Second division
    Second division
In my opinion, the solution to the problem is being approached in the wrong way. LaLiga is the body/company that administers the First and Second Divisions in Spain. Therefore LaLiga should have its own page as it happened now. The error is in the name of the First Division. The current page "La Liga" should be renamed: "Primera División" or "Primera División de Fútbol Profesional" as it is popularly known. The page of the Second Division is called: "Segunda División" and not "La Liga 2". I think it was a mistake to call the popularly known "Primera División" "La Liga". When a team ascends to the First Division, the popular chants are to sing: "A primera oe, a primera oee.." the figure of LaLiga is never called. The day that the organization that administers the First Division is another with another commercial name what will be done? The Penfield Homunculus (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate? Also, there is no move request yet at the target as suggested by one of the participants. Notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get rid of the July 22 logpage. It seems there are several related entities at play referred to by variants of "LaLiga", but the relationship between them is unclear to me. Keep, retarget, or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is veering towards a noconsensus close. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:08, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leave as is - If someone types in "LaLiga", they're almost certainly looking for the La Liga page. I will also add that "Liga Nacional de Fútbol Profesional" is still the official name of the body that organises the league (see here). – PeeJay 14:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Moment (time)

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. No hope of consensus, as J947 said. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

r Incomplete disambiguation. Retarget to either the disambiguation page or Instant. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:53, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:37, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep for now per the above. I am inclined to retarget to the dab section as incomplete disambiguation, but given the years that the unit article was at this title, let's see what traffic it's getting (without it being at Rfd) now that the internal links have been updated. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:48, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep has momentum, but retarget collectively still has more support. One more try for clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 04:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • ReTarget to Moment#Time. There isn't a whole lot of difference between this and keeping it pointed to Moment (unit) with a hatnote, except the dab has more listed there - including moment (unit) - and so also provides a bit of better context showing usage, I think. So I think that this is slightly better for navigation purposes. - jc37 13:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think one small difference is that the reader directed to this redirect might not actually know what it is that the linker referred to (unlikely for each individual reader, but certainly possible over a large cohort), and could take it to be instant or the present. As an actual natural search term, its utility is very slim. J947 † edits 10:24, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's part of the problem. We don't know what each instance of a link was intended to mean, either. So it's better to point to them all, and let the reader figure it out by the context of the link that led them there. - jc37 13:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is an involved relist to get rid of the July 8 logpage. What should this redirect target - Instant, Moment#Time, or Moment (unit)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • What a farce. This RfD should have been closed as no consensus two months ago, and that outcome has hardly changed a bit since. We'd have long finished the second RfD by then. Massive waste of time. J947 † edits 03:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 15:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous search term: may refer to the current legal status of homosexuality (in which case the current redirect is acceptable), or the Decriminalization of homosexuality more generally. I propose deletion as an unlikely search term, or failing that a disambiguation. GnocchiFan (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Less sure if the redirect Legal status of LGBT should also be considered here, but adding to this discussion. GnocchiFan (talk) 15:09, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This seems completely unclear. (Homosexuality legal) can refer to, as stated above, the decriminalization of homosexuality. It can refer to the present status of civil rights for homosexual people in the present and future. It can also refer to the history of law and politics on the matter. A lot of vagueness. As for the other redirect, I'm not entirely sure since maybe I should think about it some more. I lean to the option of deleting that as well, though. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete:bad grammar and thus vague. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "Legalisation" and "decriminalisation" aren't synonymous, but it's phrased like a search query not a title so let the search engine handle it; it's what it's for. (As a note, there is another similarly phrased redirect: Homosexuality legal in Brazil.) – Scyrme (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Should that one be bundled? Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's unlikely they'd be given the same target, so probably best not to bundle. If it's warranted it would be better to nominate it separately, maybe after this is closed. – Scyrme (talk) 01:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - it's a search term. If it were in common use then finding a suitable target would be appropriate, but this has zero hits in 30 days before the nomination and only 3 in the last 90 days. It's not being used, it should just be deleted. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Soysauce

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. It's snowing! (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have never seen this condiment spelled this way, without a space, anywhere on any source. The most common spellings are soy sauce, and soya sauce in British English, but never as one word "soysauce". Google searching the term in quotes does not give many results about the sauce itself. Colgatepony234 (talk) 14:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Jesse John Fleay

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

not mentioned in target article -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:49, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Draft:Maarten Rijkers

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Draft has been moved as mainspace redirect. estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - this redirect has an odd history. It was a page-move redirect left over from a draft moved to article space, which was then merged to a related article, and the redirect that was left behind from that merge was speedy deleted per G5. This redirect was later moved to article space, which also left behind a new page-move redirect (don't move redirects, kids!), so this basically qualifies for either G5 or G7 deletion depending on which page you start looking at the history from. None of the redirects are useful to anyone who isn't banned, anyway. Alternatively, retarget to the current double-redirect target, Beatrix of the Netherlands#Kissed by a bystander, 1988, but I don't think that's particularly useful. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Alt.slack

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. Closing a few hours early per WP:SNOW, and since the term is now mentioned at the target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. Is this alt.binaries.slack? 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:14, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Nenu Meeku Telusa...?

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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The film's name has no dots [5]. Erroneous title. DareshMohan (talk) 05:34, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion: Per nom. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This redirect page was created on 13 December 2008, titled Nenu Meeku Telusa? and redirecting Nenu Meeku Telusa...?. Redirect page Nenu Meeku Telusa? was moved to Nenu Meeku Telusa...?, and article Nenu Meeku Telusa...? was moved to Nenu Meeku Telusa?, by round-robin history swap on 25 May 2023. But the film's title in IMDb is Nenu Meeku Telusa...? (dots included), which at least can be seen as an alternative name of this film. So this redirect page should be kept, and Template:R from alternative name can be added. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since when did IMDb become RS? Please read WP:IMDB/RS. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:01, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:IMDB/RS, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Resources, applies to article writing, and, in my view, may not apply to redirect pages. A redirect page as an alternative name does not have to be found in reliable sources. An alternative name used in common databases (such as IMDb) is also acceptable to be a redirect page (see Wikipedia:Redirect: "Alternate forms of a name as found in reliable sources and common databases."). PS: "Nenu Meeku Telusa...?" (dots included) can also be found in timesofindia.indiatimes.com (see this), which I think is a reliable source. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_21&oldid=1198668753"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 21, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.