Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 12: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 00:52, 16 May 2020

< May 11

May 13 >

May 12

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 12, 2020.

Interstate 425

Interstate 425 → Interstate 270 (Colorado) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned at the target. I see that U.S. Route 425, although I'm not sure if it's ever referred to as "Interstate 425". Either redirect to there or delete if no justification for the current target can be provided. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I don't know either. But U.S. Route 425 is not Interstate 425 as a quick search pops up. And plus Interstate 425 is nonexistent. 3125A^{Talk!_{Contributions!}} 15:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Revert Imzadi1979's move of Interstate 425 in Colorado to Interstate 425, to fix the page history back to CRoy77's intent when creating the redirect. In fact, I would warn Imzadi1979 that suppressing the redirect is a violation of WP:PMRC and that further violations can and should lead to a revocation of the page mover user right. While it may be true that the disambiguation is "unneeded", that is not a reason for deletion, speedy or otherwise. It is also a violation of WP:MOVEREDIRECT, which states that moving redirects are rarely useful. Instead, if Imzadi1979 felt that there should be a redirect titled "Interstate 425", they should have created the redirect themselves, and if they felt that "Interstate 425 in Colorado" should be deleted, they should have nominated that redirect at RFD (which I would advise against because I would !vote to keep that redirect). Now to the meat of the issue, Interstate 270 (Colorado) connects Interstates 25 and 70, so the interstate could just as easily been an auxiliary of 25 over 70. So, I suspected that it was a provisional name before its creation. A little digging shows "Preliminary numbering for the freeway connecting I-80S (now I-76) and Stapleton International Airport in Denver identified the loop as Interstate 425. The designation was changed to Interstate 270 by AASHO on February 26, 1959" -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is somewhere between "redirects are cheap" and "not everything needs a redirect". On one hand, I see the benefit of having an I-425 page redirect to I-270. On the other hand, what page is going to use the I-425 link? If you want to include it on the list of Colorado Interstate Highways simply because the number was used in the planning stages then changed to I-270 before the road was built, then you should be swatted with a rolled-up newspaper. If it doesn't have any useful purpose, deletion is the way to go. –Fredddie ™ 18:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What Tavix said. per Tavix. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—per Freddie. These preliminary numbers are rarely worth mentioning, and even more rarely worth linking. (P.S. the original wasn't in compliance with WP:USSH, which is why it was moved.) Imzadi 1979 → 04:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Imzadi1979: see RHARMFUL. Also, why did you violate WP:PMRC? — J947 ^[cont] 04:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Imzadi1979: Naming conventions are for the titles of articles, they are inapplicable to redirects. This is yet another reason why you should not have the page mover right. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:25, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Revert per Tavix. — J947 ^[cont] 04:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Molderland

Molderland → Moldavia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target, no hits on Google Scholar. The spelling suggests that it could be a German term, but there's no entry on deWiki either. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I could find nothing at all. The German names for Moldavia/Moldova and so on all derive from "Moldau", and changing -au to -er strikes me as highly implausible; it's not how German works. I can find no evidence that "mold", "molde", "molden" or "molder" exist in German. Narky Blert (talk) 04:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Hello guys, sorry I left the job unfinished, after the redirection I should have added more relevant info on the Moldavia article, which now | I have just done. Thank you and sorry for any incoveniences. 13:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caliniuc (talk • contribs)

Who is this? Use your signature correctly 3125A^{Talk!_{Contributions!}} 15:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@3125A: It's probably not a good idea for someone who has a problematic line-stretching signature to tell someone to "use your signature correctly". To answer the "Who is this?" question, that can be answered by looking at the page history. The edit was made by Caliniuc at 13:38, 13 May 2020. Using {{unsigned}} would be a better way to resolve the issue, which I am applying with this edit to show how it's done. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Petrus Schroderus

Petrus Schroderus → Finns (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target. Searching online suggests that this is the name of a Finnish person, but does not establish why it should point at our article for Finns. Delete unless a justification or alternative can be provided. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CCP Virus

CCP Virus → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
CCP virus → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

CCP Virus is the terminology used by The Epoch Times (RSP entry). A WP:DEPRECATED source that is consistently disseminating misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (e.g. conspiracy theories and hoaxes already proven fake). Wikipedia should not be amplifying hoaxes by including them in places that do not have critical comment. See coverage at The Epoch Times. MarioGom (talk) 16:48, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There is another variant: CCP virus. --MarioGom (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's not just the Epoch Times, CCP Virus is all over the Internet. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's true. But note that a lot of the "CCP Virus" instances revolve around stories or videos published initially by The Epoch Times. So, yes, as many hoaxes and misinformation pieces, they find echo in several places. In any case, the usage of the term is still problematic even if social media users or some questionable sources gradually adopted it. --MarioGom (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Before this it was called the "Wuhan virus" by Chinese news outlets and people in some Chinese demographics still refer to it as such and it's become WP:COMMONNAME among them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. "Wuhan virus", while arguably inappropriate, was largely used by sources in many countries and languages. "CCP virus" doesn't seem WP:COMMONNAME and it is actually linked to some of the conspiracy theories that we document at Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. If delete is not found appropriate (I think it is), then I would suggest retarget to Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. For similar reasons that we redirect Fake ABC News to List of nicknames used by Donald Trump#Organizations and not to ABC News. --MarioGom (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "Wuhan virus" redirect. Delete tendentious POV "CCP virus". Zezen (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Zezen: Wuhan virus is not nominated, nor is it part of this nomination. Steel1943 (talk) 23:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: CCP virus added to the nomination. Steel1943 (talk) 23:34, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget - Since this term appears to refer to conspiracy theories, I think that it should go to 'misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic'. I'd be more or less fine with deletion as well, I guess. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Retarget - The term is admittedly tendentious, but it is widely used by New Tang Dynasty Television, and China Uncensored uses it frequently outside the context of conspiracy theories in most of its videos. It is not unreasonable to think that people will be looking up the term on Wikipedia to find more information about the virus, which is why it is valuable as a redirect. -Iketsi (talk) 04:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this isn't about the viral spread of Maoism in the 60s -- 65.94.170.207 (talk) 09:17, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly politically charged name, propaganda, not backed by science at all, controversial and more. Iluvalar (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Iluvalar: And how does that justify keeping? 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Because I know it is ;) . Iluvalar (talk) 20:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If WP:DUE, mention the term in Criticism of response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Chinese government and retarget there; if not, delete. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:26, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Extremely non-neutral, politically charged name mostly used by fringe conspiracy theorists. We shouldn't give a name like this legitimacy. Nmurali02 (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment More accurately, it is most often used in the context of non conspirational criticism of the Chinese government's response to the pandemic. Per @King of Hearts:, it should be retargeted to Criticism of response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Chinese government. -Iketsi (talk) 21:18, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not a common name and is rarely used elsewhere. --Efly (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Referred to in some Chinese circles as such. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep CCP Virus, China Virus, Wuhan Virus have all been used by people, news. I came here because of a youtube ad that used CCP Virus. If its propaganda then the argument should be that if someone hears CCP Virus and wonders what it is, Wikipedia should redirect them to correct page (with correct terminology) and not leave them wondering. Do you really want them to search/find only the propaganda websites that use it?. -EatingFudge (talk) 20:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to 'Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Chinese biological weapon' or delete. Strongly believe this must not be kept as is. The term is produced almost exclusively among conspiracy theorists, and Wikipedia should not legitimise something that has no reliable sourcing whatsoever by keeping a redirect to it like this. At the very least it should be a disambig with the misinformation link at the top. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 11:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This term is never used apart from hoaxes and propaganda. Leaving the page gives it legitimacy and endorsement. It's also attracting vandals who add politically motivated conspiracies and general vandalism. Signvisas (let's talk!) 13:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Redirects are not required to be neutral. feminist #WearAMask😷 11:10, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not opposed to retargetting this to a potentially more relevant article. It's just that neutrality is not a reason to delete a redirect. feminist #WearAMask😷 16:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 13:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. If the term really is all over the Internet, readers are going to be searching for it. It would be a disservice them to delete this redirect and to leave them guessing. It would also be a disservice to keep it as a redirect to 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, giving the impression that it's an appropriate term. Point it where it belongs, so that the first thing they see gives them an idea of the quality of the source they found it in. Narky Blert (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose retarget. If the intention to retarget is to give the term a characterization of the source where they found the term("gives them [readers] an idea of the quality of the source they found it in"), I feel strongly that it would constitute a violation of Wikipedia:ORIGINAL to say the least.--Chlorineer (talk) 15:38, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as no suitable target, it could be to 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (because people may call it that), Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (because it probably wasn't created by the CCP), or Criticism of response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 20:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_2#Terminology. We shouldn't be trying to guess what they mean. Terminology is guaranteed to address the basic title if we include it.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 21:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but retarget to the terminology section of Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.--Chlorineer (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic per Narky Blert. Criticism of response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic is no longer an article; it now redirects to National responses to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (see AfD). Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is not a useful target, it doesn't mention the Party or the Chinese government at all, let alone the origin of this term. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 14:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose retarget to Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. That article does not discuss the term "CCP" at all.--Chlorineer (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are right. In fact, the sole remaining use of this term in English Wikipedia is an incidental mention at List of incidents of xenophobia and racism related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. There is also a Wiktionary entry which is listed at Wiktionary:Requests for verification. I don't think either of those is more useful than search results. So I'll change my opinion to delete. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to SARS-CoV-2; that's what is literally meant by "CCP virus", or alternately Coronavirus disease 2019 or the pandemic article. Oppose retargeting to misinformation article because the people probably want info on the virus, not on misinformation. b uidhe 07:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete for now, as there doesn't seem to be a consensus other than the current target is inappropriate, if the term is worth discussing in detail somewhere, then it can be recreated. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This name is in common use, as I have seen it in print and on television in the last 24 hours. It is a POV name, but we should enable our readers to find out what it really means easily by having a redirect. Whether the name is explained in the article is a different issue, and I do not think it is required for all redirects. A possible alternative destination is Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2‎. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2#Terminology as per Naddruf above. It is not the official name of the virus, and it says so in this article, WHO has advised against using locations in disease and virus names from 2015. The fact that there is this much discussion on this term shows that it's a controversial term and should be redirected to a neutral PoV of the virus' terminology. Valkyrino (talk) 06:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Valkyrino. --Soumyabrata ^talk _contribs ^subpages 09:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs) 21:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Nielsen (producer)

Mark Nielsen (producer) → Mater and the Ghostlight (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

From his IMDb entry, I doubt whether he is notable. I am however certain that a redirect to a video short which he produced and which does no more than mention his name is less than useful. Narky Blert (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update by nom. He won an Academy Award for Best Animated Feature for Toy Story 4. I still think that readers would be better served by a redlink than a redirect. Narky Blert (talk) 14:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gamont

Gamont → Dune (franchise)#Plot arc (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Should be deleted, waiting the proper article to be written. Deals about a microbiology topic (see pages linking to it). Weirdly links to a space opera article, with no records of the word in the target article. Fraf (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Apicomplexa (1^st choice) or delete to encourage article creation (2^nd choice). This would be a more feasible option than to redirect here, as the planet Gamont (which is probably what this redirect refers to in the context of the Dune franchise) doesn't seem to be prominent from what we see on its page on the Dune Wiki, and the topic seems to have more widespread usage in microbiology (as the nom says). Regards, SONIC678 17:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The planet is anecdotal in the Dune series. I created this redirect in 2007, and it is clearly unnecessary now for that franchise. The parasite is clearly the primary topic here (and I believe this redirect predated any parasite-related links). Thanks!— TAnthony^Talk 18:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NBA Horse Challenge

NBA Horse Challenge → Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on sports#North America 3 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not currently mentioned at the target, delete unless a due mention is added. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 17:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

High Exit-Only Turnstile

High Exit-Only Turnstile → Turnstile (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete unused/unneeded. Dicklyon (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Agreed. This seems useless. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article does say (although unsourced) "There are two types of full height turnstiles, High Entrance/Exit Turnstile (HEET) and Exit-Only", so I can infer the 2nd type is fully a High Exit-Only Turnstile. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:44, 28 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 18:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:27, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Smurf communism

Smurf communism → The Smurfs#Smurf Economy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The Smurfs and communism → The Smurfs#Economy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of communism at target article. The Smurfs and communism was originally deleted and when the recreated article was nominated for AfD, it was moved to Smurf communism. Delete unless a justification can be proven OcelotCreeper (talk) 20:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Can someone help fix this? OcelotCreeper (talk) 20:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Turned out I forgot to place the last 2 brackets for the link The Smurfs and communism, which led to the substitution template breaking. OcelotCreeper (talk) 20:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Anarchyte (talk • work) 04:43, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to The Smurfs#Sociological discussion. The content of the article, prior to the redirect, was loosely equivalent to the section #Smurfs and political controversy at the time of the redirect; since then, that content has been condensed and moved to the "Sociological discussion" section, so the logical approach would be to retarget both redirects to the new location of the content. --Waldyrious (talk) 09:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to The Smurfs#Sociological discussion per CycloneYoris. SnowFire (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Male pornography

Male pornography → Gay pornography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Male porn → Gay pornography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not equivalent, I would suggest deletion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:59, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - female pornography also exists. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 21:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 21:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both to Pornography. These redirects are both plausible search terms, in my opinion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to pornography per CycloneYoris. Narky Blert (talk) 12:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Replace with a disambiguation page This may refer to Women's pornography, Gay pornography, or just Pornography in general. So offer a choice on a disambiguation page. -- SamuelWantman 02:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Ukraine

Ancient Ukraine → Kievan Rus' (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

KIENGIR nominated incorrectly: Sock created page, the validity is disputable, possible POV issue.
Additional coment: Kievan Rus' is a loose federation, not specifically "ancient Ukraine". CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs) 18:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to History of Ukraine - More likely to be searched for instead of Kievan Rus. Especially when people are looking for ancient Ukraine, not just one period in history. Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 21:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to History of Ukraine per Koridas. Kievan Rus' extended well beyond Ukraine, and its period was well after what most people call "ancient" (which I'd place at no later than 500 AD at the outside). Narky Blert (talk) 12:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1990 Polish local elections

1990 Polish local elections → Elections in Poland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
1994 Polish local elections → Elections in Poland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
1998 Polish local elections → Elections in Poland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The 1990 one should be a separate article, and the 1994 and 1998 ones are not mentioned in target Andrei (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RAW World Champion

RAW World Champion → WWE Universal Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The WWE Universal Championship is currently defended on Smackdown. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete could just as easily be a description of World Heavyweight Championship (WWE) which was in storyline originally created as a RAW exclusive championship from Sept. 2 2002 to June 30th 2005 after Brock Lesner refused to wrestle on RAW. In fact a quick check shows that the difference in time between the two belts moving to Smackdown was about 6 months.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 15:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Obamagate

orange man bad

Prestige class

Prestige class → Prestige class (Dungeons & Dragons) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not specific to D&D, as can be seen from the incoming links. Note that the previous target has just been deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prestige classes. Prestige class is linked from e.g. Wizardry, Star Wars Roleplaying Game (Wizards of the Coast), and A Game of Thrones (role-playing game), which are all sent to a completely unrelated page through this link. This is a generic term and shouldn't link to one specific use of it only. Fram (talk) 07:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate per BOZ at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 11#List of prestige classes. --Pandakekok9 (talk) 09:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Revert move and restore redirect. The Star Wars / GoT uses are d20 System games based off of Dungeons & Dragons 3rd edition. They probably shouldn't link to it at all, but if they do, it's still covering the same fundamental topic. The Wizardry claim that it was doing something similar to prestige classes is wholly unreferenced and original research, and there's no earthly way prestige-classes in Wizardry would ever be appropriate for an article. It's just some editor who thought Wizardy's system was close to 3rd edition D&D, which makes the original link to the D&D meaning accurate anyway - it's claiming that Wizardry was doing something like what D&D prestige classes did. SnowFire (talk) 01:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per Pandakekok9. Drafted below the redirect. The Dungeons & Dragons concept doesn't appear to be WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT either by usage in reliable sources (e.g. Google News hits, which are mostly about airlines & trains whose business/first class is called "prestige class") or long-term significance. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- None of the offered suggestions are relevant disambig page mentions. We don't have first class or First class travel contain a list of every company that offers something called "First class"; we don't need a mention that Korean Air offers something similar called "prestige class" either. Same with a random term used by a short-lived event in Renault Sport Trophy, either. The D&D meaning (before it was moved) is the proper link here that can actually have a referenced section talking about the concept. SnowFire (talk) 17:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twelve schoos and a scho

MIT Schoo of Business → MIT World Peace University (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Salmon Bay Schoo → Seattle Public Schools (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sierra High Schoo (Manteca, California) → Sierra High School (Manteca, California) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Emerson Preparatory Schoo → Emerson Preparatory School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
St Cuthbert's Catholic High Schoo → St Cuthbert's Catholic High School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fengshan Senior High Schoo → National Fengshan Senior High School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
St. Mary's Convent High Schoo, Mapusa, Goa → St. Mary's Convent High School, Goa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Chesapeake High Schoo → Chesapeake High School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Walkerton District Community Schoo → Walkerton District Community School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Datuk Awang Jabar Secondary Schoo → SMK Datuk Awang Jabar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Saetbyoul Middle Schoo → Saetbyoul Middle School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Pedmore Secondary Modern Schoo → Pedmore High School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Northeast High Scho → Northeast Senior High School (Pasadena, Maryland) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 April 18 § Datuk Awang Jabar Secondary Schoo – keep

These redirects seem to get fewer pageviews on average than their targets and/or any correctly spelled counterparts...I'm wondering how plausible "schoo" is in the context of this misspelling. Oh, and there's a similar "scho" as well. Regards, SONIC678 06:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as unambiguously created in error and useless clutter. Narky Blert (talk) 10:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all G6, unambiguously created in error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_May_10#Eight_more_schoolls CrazyBoy826 (talk | contribs) 21:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wuhanvirus, Wuhan virus, etc.

Wuhanvirus → Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wuhan virus → Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wuhan Virus → Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There may be additional redirects similar to those listed above. "Wuhan virus" is used informally in various contexts to refer to SARS-CoV-2. The issue is that "Wuhanvirus" is a recently recognized genus of viruses. It belongs to the family Autographiviridae, which has an article. Advice is sought on various ways or the proper way to address this. Another discussion about this is here. Velayinosu (talk) 03:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep and hatnote the SARS CoV-2 article.~~ --Soumyabrata ^talk _contribs ^subpages 09:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Wuhanvirus to Autographiviridae as {{R from related topic}} {{R with possibilities}}.

Keep Wuhan virus as a redirect to Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and add hatnote {{redirect|Wuhan virus|the genus of viruses|Wuhanvirus}}. Narky Blert (talk) 10:46, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Wuhan Virus to the nomination. – Uanfala (talk) 18:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The punctilious thing to do would be take advantage of the fact that each of the two variants is "correct" for only one of the uses and so redirect Wuhan virus to the SARS-CoV-2 article, and Wuhanvirus to Autographiviridae. But the difference between the two terms is so small, that a hatnote would then be needed on both targets, and I don't like the idea of that: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, one of wikipedia's most popular articles, already has a lengthy and unavoidable hatnote and it would go over the top if another hatnote were added for such an extremely obscure and unrelated virus. On the other hand, we can't redirect Wuhan virus to Autographiviridae as this variant is apparently only ever used to refer to the SARS virus. An outcome that avoids these situations is to create a disambiguation page: it's standard practice for dab pages to disambiguate related terms, and the redirects aren't used that much so there isn't a big group of readers that we'll be doing a disservice to by intervening in their navigational path with a small dab page. I've drafted one below the redirect at Wuhan virus. – Uanfala (talk) 18:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Uanfala: You should remember that Wikipedia is not a paper. Anyway, changing my !vote. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we're not constrained for the size of our pages, but that doesn't exempt us from considering potential clutter at the top of articles: hatnotes should generally be as few as possible and as concise as practicable (WP:1HAT). Also, the term "Wuhan virus" is loaded so it's best to avoid giving it prominence via a mention at the top of the article. – Uanfala (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per Wuhanfala. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate Seems like the sensible decision. Zoozaz1 23:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Former Kill Paris redirects

Kill Paris discography → Owsla (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Galaxies Between Us → Owsla (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Corey Baker (DJ) → Owsla (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Chill Harris → Owsla (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target nor anywhere else on the encyclopedia. Result of redirection of the former target, Kill Paris, to this target per Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Flooded with them hundreds. Jalen Folf (talk) 02:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not mentioned in Owsla, and I can't think of any reason why they should be. Narky Blert (talk) 10:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nugrape Twins

Nugrape Twins → NuGrape (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I Got Your Ice Cold Nugrape → NuGrape (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Apparently this is a very old band with a very old song about some drink. Neither are mentioned at the article, so these redirects are unhelpful. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 01:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not a lyrics database. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 166: / Line 166: @@
 ====Obamagate====
+orange man bad
-*<span id="Obamagate">{{no redirect|1 = Obamagate }}</span> → [[:Spygate (conspiracy theory)]] <span>&nbsp;<span class="plainlinks lx">([[Talk:Obamagate|talk]] <b>·</b> [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Obamagate|links]] <b>·</b> [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Obamagate&action=history history] <b>·</b> [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2020-04-12&end=2020-05-11&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Obamagate stats])</span></span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<small class="plainlinks"><nowiki>[</nowiki>&nbsp;Closure:&nbsp;''{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Obamagate|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:[[{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Obamagate]] closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Obamagate|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:[[{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Obamagate]] closed as retarget}}}} retarget]<span class="sysop-show">/[{{fullurl:Obamagate|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:[[{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Obamagate]] closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]</span>}}''&nbsp;]</small>&nbsp;
-{{old rfd list|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 9#Obamagate|delete}}
-Obamagate does not exist, the target article does not mention this term, and Wikipedia should not prop up or legitimize nutty QAnon conspiracy theories. That is Mr. Trump's job, not ours. --[[User:Bongwarrior|Bongwarrior]] ([[User talk:Bongwarrior|talk]]) 07:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-*Spygate doesn't exist. Birtherism doesn't exist. Harry Potter doesn't exist. It's a plausible search term that should point ''somewhere''. I looked for [[Long-term lies and BS of Donald Trump]] but that's a redlinkd. ―[[User:Koavf|Justin (<span style="color:grey">ko'''a'''vf</span>)]]<span style="color:red">❤[[User talk:Koavf|T]]☮[[Special:Contributions/Koavf|C]]☺[[Special:Emailuser/Koavf|M]]☯</span> 07:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Comment'''. There's [[:Category:Conspiracy theories promoted by Donald Trump]], but no-one seems to have yet been motivated to write a main article. [[User:Narky Blert|Narky Blert]] ([[User talk:Narky Blert|talk]]) 10:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-**How can anyone write an article when we don't even know what it would be about? &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 16:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''': [[WP:CHEAP|Redirects are cheap]] and harmless. This is a plausible search term and its absence would make more of a political statement than its presence, although that could be the entire point of nominating this redirect for deletion. [[Special:Contributions/173.85.194.197|173.85.194.197]] ([[User talk:173.85.194.197|talk]]) 15:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-**'''Comment''': I agree, and there is enough discussion of it that there is (unfortunately) notability. Let the investigative reporting turn up further details, then a main page may be needed. - [[User:Peter_Ellis|Peter Ellis]] - [[User_talk:Peter_Ellis|Talk]] 00:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-***'''Comment''': I also agree that there should be a redirect. I arrived here because I searched for 'Obamagate' having heard the US President refer to it and state that it can be read about in all newspapers (except the Washington Post). I have noticed that some news outlets have now started to run articles explaining what Obamagate is or might be. [[User:Constantine-x|Constantine]] ([[User talk:Constantine-x|talk]]) 19:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' no evidence provided for the term and while it does not redirect to the same article as it did back then this should be deleted per the reasoning at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 9#Obamagate]].--[[Special:Contributions/69.157.252.96|69.157.252.96]] ([[User talk:69.157.252.96|talk]]) 15:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-* '''Delete''' We don't even know what "Obamagate" is supposed to refer to.[https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-obamagate-conspiracy-theory-wont-explain-says-obvious-2020-5] It could mean something else, not Spygate, and therefore be mistargeted. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 17:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-::That’s a good point since at one point this redirected to what is now known as [[Trump Tower wiretapping allegations]] before it was deleted a few years back. In fact outside of the Donald Trump series template the original article this redirected to doesn’t even mention the current target.--[[Special:Contributions/69.157.252.96|69.157.252.96]] ([[User talk:69.157.252.96|talk]]) 17:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Mixed thoughts, but weak oppose deletion''' I think this redirect should continue to lead ''somewhere'', but I don't know where. My limited exposure to the word "Obamagate" makes me think that Spygate isn't the best target article, but it's still very unclear to me what it's actually meant to refer to. The majority of news articles I'm seeing are specifically about Trump's inability to explain what the term means. I don't understand what "Obamagate" is, but I think the term is at least receiving enough coverage that readers should be able to find relevant well-sourced information if they type the term into the search bar. If it redirects the user to an explanation about how it's one of Trump's neologisms or conspiracy theories, that's fine by me. If it redirects the user to a well-sourced overview of what the term alleges Obama may or may not have done, that's fine by me as well. I agree with Koavf and the anonymous IP editor that redirects are cheap and that even nonsensical made-up scandals warrant redirects because they're plausible search terms. <b style="font-family:Trebuchet MS">[[User:Vanilla Wizard|<b style="background-color:#07d;color:#FFF">&nbsp;Vanilla </b>]][[User Talk:Vanilla Wizard|<b style="background-color:#749;color:#FFF">&nbsp;Wizard </b>]]</b> [[Special:Contribs/Vanilla Wizard|💙]] 23:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-* '''Oppose redirect.'''  The Spygate article says that it's about Trump's conspiracy theory "that the Obama administration had placed a spy in his 2016 presidential campaign for political purposes."  Obamagate doesn't refer specifically (and perhaps not at all) to that particular bit of Trump mendacity.  According to [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-barack-obama-obamagate-a9509501.html this article], "Not even Trump appears to know what exactly Obamagate is," but it appears to relate more to the prosecution of Michael Flynn.  I think "Obamagate" is notable enough to merit its own article.  The unfortunate truth is that Trump, because he's President of the United States, has an unmatched "bully pulpit" for spouting pure bullshit and thereby rendering it notable.  A wikilink to the Spygate article would be appropriate, though. [[User:JamesMLane|JamesMLane]]<small>&nbsp;[[User_talk:JamesMLane|t]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/JamesMLane|c]]</small> 23:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete and salt''' - Per [[WP:NOTPROPAGANDA]]. This obscure neologism used as a redirect to [[Spygate (conspiracy theory)]] should be deleted per [[WP:R#DELETE]] 2, 3, 5, and 8. I generally disagree that it should be redirected somewhere as we are supposed to be writing an encyclopedia, not the Trumpian version of [[Urban Dictionary]]. However, if we had to keep this redirect, the most appropriate target would probably be [[Veracity of statements by Donald Trump]]. - [[user:MrX|MrX]][[user talk:MrX| 🖋]] 02:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-::Wikipedia doesn't ''promulgate'' propaganda but we ''report'' propaganda if it's notable.  The article [[And you are lynching Negroes]] is distinct from all the articles that report the facts about lynching; that one reports the facts about the USSR's propaganda about lynching.  Of course, lynching was real, but our [[Death panels]] and [[Stab-in-the-back myth]] articles report on notable bits of propaganda that were false. [[User:JamesMLane|JamesMLane]]<small>&nbsp;[[User_talk:JamesMLane|t]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/JamesMLane|c]]</small> 02:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' Not our job to spread idiotic conspiracy theory twitter hashtags.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Volunteer Marek|<span style="color:orange;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Volunteer Marek '''</span>]]</span></small> 04:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Keep''' From what's being said by POTUS, it's pretty much the [[Spygate (conspiracy theory)|Spygate]] controversy, rebooted in 2020 with a "dirty cop" claim instead of a "spy". If you delete it without salting, it will almost certainly be recreated. If you salt, editors will include "Obamagate" ion the Spygate article and articles will link to there. Deleting is a bad idea since it's counterproductive, doing nothing and letting the Wikipedia community run its course seems appropriate. [[User:Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion|Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion]] ([[User talk:Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion|talk]]) 09:15, 13 May 2020 (UTC)<small>— [[User:Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion|Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion]] ([[User talk:Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion|talk]]&#32;• [[Special:Contributions/Throwawayforcourtesydiscussion|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small>
-*'''Delete''' - even Trump doesn't seem to know what conspiracy he's trying to invent here. It isn't our job to try to make sense of this. [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] ([[User talk:Guettarda|talk]]) 12:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-::The issue isn't making sense of it.  The issue is whether the term, be it sensible or nonsense, is notable.  I just did a Google search for "Obamagate" and got 2.2 million hits (up from, IIRC, 1.6 million just a day or two ago).  Having the article wouldn't constitute an endorsement.  In fact, the article, along with reporting statements by Trump and his supporters, should also report the notable opinion, per [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-barack-obama-obamagate-a9509501.html the link I posted above], that, as you say, even Trump is flailing around to try to find some specific accusation. [[User:JamesMLane|JamesMLane]]<small>&nbsp;[[User_talk:JamesMLane|t]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/JamesMLane|c]]</small> 14:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-:::An article could - indeed, should - include a sourced list of all the things he's claimed it is, expandable with whatever he may claim in future. [[User:Narky Blert|Narky Blert]] ([[User talk:Narky Blert|talk]]) 15:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''' Perhaps send it to [[Veracity of statements by Donald Trump]]?--[[User:Pharos|Pharos]] ([[User talk:Pharos|talk]]) 15:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
-:*'''Redirect''' to [[Veracity of statements by Donald Trump]] - if this link is getting [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Obamagate almost 10,000 hits in two days] then we should redirect it somewhere.--[[User:Pharos|Pharos]] ([[User talk:Pharos|talk]]) 22:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''': As I write this, this search term has gotten [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=latest-20&pages=Obamagate almost 10,000 hits in two days]. So, I don't think it is wise to just delete it, because people will just come looking for it and sooner or later want to create it again. Perhaps there is some editing or subsection creation we could do at [[Veracity of statements by Donald Trump]], that references reliable sources ([https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/trump-tweet-obamagate-rand-paul-richard-grenell.html Slate], [https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/obamagate-trump-michael-flynn-obama-fbi-russia.html New York Magazine], [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-press-conference-obamagate-coronavirus-twitter-obama-flynn-a9509481.html The Independent]) that explain that Trump made reference to this term in a recent press conference, but refused to elaborate on its meaning? I am certainly open to discussion; Thanks to all for your contributions to WP. [[User:KConWiki|KConWiki]] ([[User talk:KConWiki|talk]]) 05:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''' There has been considerable coverage of this term, much of which has been posted above. See also [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/12/what-is-obamagate-and-why-is-trump-so-worked-up-about-it] which also emphasises (like the above sources) that it's not known what the term actually refers to. The term was not apparently coined by Trump. Its earliest uses appear to be in reference to the [[Trump Tower wiretapping allegations]], ascribed to unnamed supporters of Trump (see [https://money.cnn.com/2017/03/06/media/mark-levin-joel-pollak-breitbart-trump-obama/]). This renders the current redirect to Spygate invalid. On the other hand, I think it's likely that Trump was thinking of the Spygate theory when he used the term, but we cannot base a decision on attempted mindreading of the president. Best solution, eventually, will be to have a page specifically for conspiracy theories supported by Donald Trump, redirect Obamagate to there, and give it a section outlining his promotion of this theory along with the fact that nobody seems to know what it is. For now, I think redirecting to Spygate is the best option. It certainly shouldn't be deleted when it's receiving so much coverage. It's definitely notable.[[User:Wikiditm|Wikiditm]] ([[User talk:Wikiditm|talk]]) 09:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-* '''Redirect''' to [[List of conspiracy theories promoted by Donald Trump]]. I think it could be made a subsection. [[User:Afvalbak|Afvalbak]] ([[User talk:Afvalbak|talk]]) 11:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-::That seems like a plausible approach, but my concern is that "List of" articles are usually just lists.  In this instance, the subsection would presumably be along the lines of "Trump has used the term 'Obamagate' to allude vaguely to some sort of improper conduct by his predecessor, but has not specified exactly what it was, although he used the term in the context of the prosecution of Michael Flynn."  That would work ''unless'' it leads to an edit war in which people repeatedly remove the subsection on the grounds that it's not proper for a "List of" article.  Are you confident that it would stay? [[User:JamesMLane|JamesMLane]]<small>&nbsp;[[User_talk:JamesMLane|t]]&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/JamesMLane|c]]</small> 01:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-* '''Delete''' per others above. [[User:PCN02WPS|<span style="color:grey;">'''PCN02WPS'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:PCN02WPS|<span style="color:grey;">talk</span>]] &#124; [[Special:Contributions/PCN02WPS|<span style="color:grey;">contribs</span>]])</small> 16:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' no clear redirect, not until/unless Trump decides to define this... [[User:Ɱ|<span style="text-shadow:#bbb 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em;" class="texhtml">'''ɱ'''</span>]] [[User talk:Ɱ|(talk)]] 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete'''  There is no specific information to form a redirect.  It is a fad term designed to obfuscate. &nbsp;--[[User:Bejnar|Bejnar]] ([[User talk:Bejnar|talk]]) 18:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' due to [[WP:NOPRIMARYTOPIC]].  Viewing a sample of the 2.2. million Google hits makes it clear that the term "Obamagate" has been applied, both while he was president and since, to pretty much anything President Obama did that someone didn't like. [[User:UnitedStatesian|UnitedStatesian]] ([[User talk:UnitedStatesian|talk]]) 19:17, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' this is utter fucking nonsense. Also take a look at [https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=US&q=obamagate this] [[User:Praxidicae|Praxidicae]] ([[User talk:Praxidicae|talk]]) 19:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete and replace with a short article'''  Obamagate is in the news.  Somebody hearing the term may very likely come here to understand what the term means.  So a brief, well sourced NPOV article that talks about Trump's and the right-wing press' conspiracy theories would be the best way to deal with it.  See also can link to the other places mentioned as redirect targets. -- <b>[[User:Sam|Sam]]</b><span style="color: #CCCCFF;">[[User talk:Sam|uelWantman]]</span> 02:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' - unless good cites can be found that say "Obamagate" = "Spygate", Wikipedia should not be deciding this.  If Trump refuses to explain what is meant by it, then all that Wikipedia should be doing, if it is determined that it is notable, is creating an article that effectively says; "Term used by Trump, unknown meaning". --[[User:Escape_Orbit|<span style="color: green;">Escape Orbit</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]]</sup> 12:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Redirect''' to [[Veracity of statements by Donald Trump]]. Nobody actually has a clue what this scandal is supposed to be, because it's made-up drivel. But people are Googling for it. Our least-bad option is a redirect to the most pertinent article we have. [[User:XOR&#39;easter|XOR&#39;easter]] ([[User talk:XOR&#39;easter|talk]]) 14:27, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*Trump released an [https://www.instagram.com/tv/CAGbYDMgbGs/ IGTV video] that does gove more insight into what "Obamagate" refers to, now just to wait for secondary reliable sources to write about it. Optimally we'd have a full article about this topic, being a newly-invented strategy of Trump (very new, see Praxidicae's links above to google trends) that is likely going to receive much more than the already significant coverage it has now. Best regards, [[User:Vermont|Vermont]] ([[User talk:Vermont|talk]]) 15:18, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Redirect''' to [[List of conspiracy theories promoted by Donald Trump]]. This should probably be deleted as not notable, but if it has a redirect, then it should go to [[List of conspiracy theories promoted by Donald Trump]]. Best, [[User:MySixthSense|MySixthSense]] ([[User talk:MySixthSense|talk]]) 18:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Redirect''' to that dumb and insulting list article. That it's not real is irrelevant, that Trump doesn't know what he's accusing someone of is also irrelevant--fact is he said it, it's been repeated, etc. The coverage is there, and that seems to be what counts these days. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 21:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''': not well defined, probably nn. Too soon to include either as an article or a redirect. --[[User:K.e.coffman|K.e.coffman]] ([[User talk:K.e.coffman|talk]]) 00:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 ====Prestige class====