Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 18: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 328: Line 328:
**I know redirects are cheap, but this seems too trivial. What is the value of having this redirect, versus the (admittedly also minor) nuisance of having this title pop up in searches when it isn't relevant? --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 19:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
**I know redirects are cheap, but this seems too trivial. What is the value of having this redirect, versus the (admittedly also minor) nuisance of having this title pop up in searches when it isn't relevant? --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 19:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
* Also note that these contain curly quotes rather than standard apostrophes. Inclined to '''delete''' for that reason alone. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 02:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
* Also note that these contain curly quotes rather than standard apostrophes. Inclined to '''delete''' for that reason alone. [[User:Pppery|* Pppery *]] [[User talk:Pppery|<sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...</sub>]] 02:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
*:@[[User:Pppery|Pppery]]: I created redirects for these that have the correct apostrophes. [[User:Interstellarity|Interstellarity]] ([[User talk:Interstellarity|talk]]) 11:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)


:'''Delete '''per nom [[User:Okmrman|Okmrman]] ([[User talk:Okmrman|talk]]) 18:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Delete '''per nom [[User:Okmrman|Okmrman]] ([[User talk:Okmrman|talk]]) 18:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:39, 23 April 2024

April 18

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 18, 2024.

Favorability

I just created it but I'm not sure anymore. I noticed willingness could mean the same. Or should it be targeted to Wiktionary? --MikutoH talk! 23:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could perhaps Dabify? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:45, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The personality trait of agreeableness has very little to do with the transient state of being favorable about something. Jcbutler (talk) 17:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm now wondering if Attitude (psychology) would be appropriate, because attitude can be defined as some level of favorability or unfavorability. Jcbutler (talk) 23:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's get some !votes in here. If you're proposing to disambiguate, please mention which pages might be listed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - I think the most common reason someone would search for this is to find what a "Favorability rating" is, in the context of Opinion polls... but that article doesn't describe or define that term specifically, so it may not be the best target. Crosswiki'ing to wiktionary won't provide the information to the searcher either, as it just defines the word and doesn't discuss or illuminate how it is used, particularly in politics, where someone might be confused about it. I feel like this may actually be a potential article in the making, but I'll be honest and say I don't want to do it. I'm also not sure where this redirect should go. Maybe leaving it as a WP:REDLINK would be best? I'm not sure! Fieari (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to wikt:favorability. Redirects are cheap and making it a soft redirect makes it much more helpful than having the reader stare at a bunch of search results. Also, both Google and DuckDuckGo mostly bring up dicdefs, so I don't think it'd hurt if we had another. Duckmather (talk) 16:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a generic term incapable of disambiguation. The sole incoming link meaning of sex-favorable may be created as a different titled redirect, if needed. Jay 💬 14:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I kind of feel like we should have an article on the concept of favorability of opinion at this title. Polling for favorability is not always reserved for politicians. BD2412 T 00:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gribbly

No mention of "grib" at the target article, much less a something or someone that's "gribbly". Alternatives include Gribbly's Day Out which exists as a standalone article, as well as Gribble, Roman Gribbs, and the music director of Rec Room (video game). Zero idea or indication why this is going to Grunge currently, although it's done so since 2007. (Doesn't seem to have been mentioned within the former history of Grunger, which is where it used to point back in 2005). These 2005 redirects are... surely something, lol. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gorbino's Quest

A fictional element and/or creative work that is not mentioned at the target. "Gorbino" does not appear at the target, nor does "Gorbino" appear anywhere on Wikipedia. Much less their quest appearing anywhere on Wikipedia; no quest is ever alluded to at the target page either. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • gorbino's quest is a fictional game and recurring... "thing" there, and probably maybe the setting of one of the levels
this is just like gorbino's quest. this is the gorbino's quest of redirects i'd keep if a mention can reasonably be made (probably in the plot section), or weak delete otherwise cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • gorbino's quest is found in cruelty squad and i wholeheartedly promise you anybody who form some bizarre reason searches for "gorbino's quest" on wikipedia is looking for the game's article Formaldehydemaster (talk) 00:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per WP:CRUFT + unmentioned. We're not the Cruelty Squad wiki, and pageviews reflect that-- this redirect gets practically no views whatsoever. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - mentioned enough in the game that it is worth looking up to determine if it is an actual game (possibly by the developer of Cruelty Squad). It turns out it is an entirely fictional element but the redirect is useful for a reader looking for that information. It'd be better if there were a mention in the target article, though. (I found and used that redirect back in 2021 in that context, and then added rcats to it afterwards.) (A redirect for just "Gorbino" would not be useful, though, and one does not currently exist either.) --Pokechu22 (talk) 00:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General OneFile

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 Gale (publisher). I believe I agree. I'm going to boldly target the main article instead of the section, as it's short enough and OneFile is mentioned throughout and not just in products. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 01:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General OneFile not mentioned or discussed at target; the only mention of onefile is in an external link, and "general" is never used in relation to it. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Gale (publisher)#Products: where it is mentioned and seems like a more relevant page now. (Although something like this a redirect without a mention where it's verifiable is still useful to readers in many cases.) Skynxnex (talk) 02:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gender and authoritarianism

Used to target a section, since removed. The article does not talk about gender, and is a WP:XY situation as it stands. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Party of Nepal—Maoist

Apparently this specific political party's formal name at one point in the past included the em dash. Since readers are unlikely to be familiar with the way Nepalese political parties copy each other's names with minor pertubations this should be retargeted to the dab at Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). * Pppery * it has begun... 20:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as is It is not a good idea to link to disambiguation pages at all. The Banner talk 20:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm?? Inline links to disambig pages from article space are usually incorrect, but I don't see any reason a redirect shouldn't point there. --Trovatore (talk) 00:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. Ambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton Strathcona

No evidence the current target is the primary topic for this specific spelling, retarget to dab at Strathcona#Canadian electoral districts. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as is Creating loads of links to disambiguation pages is not a good idea.The Banner talk 20:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm...the provincial district is hyphenated, whereas the federal district is two separate words. The incoming links seem to mainly refer to the federal district. Weak keep, I think. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am also comfortable with the solution proposed below by User:Ivanvector. It seems that the recent move by User:Arctic.gnome may have been improper based on WP:CANRIDINGDAB. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That same guideline says When federal and provincial riding names differ only in punctuation, one or both should include disambiguation in their titles as if their names were identical (e.g. Edmonton—Strathcona and Edmonton-Strathcona (provincial electoral district)).. Yes, it does use an outdated vision of this specific redirect as an example. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that is the sentence I was referring to. I am saying that the move should not have occurred based on it. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess we disagree about whether "Edmonton Strathcona" and "Edmonton-Strathcona" differ only in punctuation. I would say they do. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Swap the article with the redirect, this is unnecessary disambiguation. The federal district is "Edmonton Strathcona" and the provincial one is "Edmonton-Strathcona", and per WP:SMALLDETAILS the difference in hyphenation is sufficient to disambiguate. The federal was formerly "Edmonton—Strathcona", with an emdash, which follows the naming pattern for federal electoral districts in Canada; provincial districts usually hyphenate instead but it varies by province. When a reader looks for "Edmonton Strathcona" they should end up on one of the two topics that have this name, not a list of partial title matches. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

0–20

Second target doesn't mention it at all. First target mentioned it in passing but not with sufficient substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both - the first target does list a few examples of teams finishing their season with a 0-20 record, but each one is in a league without a set number of games that each team plays (byes and such, or seasons shortened due to lockout/illness/insolvency) such that an 0-20 record isn't necessarily "winless" in the same way as, for example, an 0-16 record is for an NFL team. The second redirect has an edit summary on creation indicating that "0-20" is a Dutch nickname for Ajax Amsterdam (which was moved to the current target some time ago) but the article does not mention this at all, and I did not find anything in a Google search that suggests this is true. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As List of winless seasons has only one mention of 0-20 (one match of all the sports listed there had the outcome once) and AFC Ajax doesn't mention 0-20 anywhere, neither are sensible redirect targets. Not clear what people would be looking for when searching this, so better to delete and let people use Wikipedia search function to find what they want when searching 0-20. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both as above. GiantSnowman 14:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

0–1

Vague term - are either of these really the primary topic. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • No idea about the latilactobacillus one, but 0-1 is a standard chess notation indicating that black won the match; the article describes this. I also have no idea how we would determine if that is the primary usage. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. Both are expressions that could show up in all sorts of contexts, and the targets are far too specific (particularly the bacillus). No obvious alternative target. --Trovatore (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note The most obvious target from my perspective is zero–one law, but that's likely biased by my background. --Trovatore (talk) 00:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. BD2412 T 01:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I suppose that's also reasonable. --Trovatore (talk) 03:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Disambiguate what? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, we could redirect one to the other, and list the three targets that have been mentioned, for a start. Not the most useful disambig page ever, but not completely implausible. --Trovatore (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Three targets is plenty for disambiguation. Also, there are several O-1 constructions (letter O rather than number 0), which could easily be confused for 0-1. BD2412 T 02:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

World – Seeks Worldwide Online Participatory Democracy

Not mentioned at either target. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Winter storms of 2006–07

WP:XY * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both per nom and per WP:REDLINK. We have articles on North American winters for every season starting with 2009–10 North American winter, while we only have coverage of winter weather for other regions when it's significantly out of character, or for specific weather events. Presumably the editors who have an interest in these articles will get to 2006-07 eventually. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

State Route 221 (Virginia 1923–1928)

Not mentioned at either target. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

South African cricket team in India in 2021–22

Not the same thing, no real discussion at either target. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: as misleading, the series was held in South Africa, and was never planned to be held in India like these redirects incorrectly suggest. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present)

Not appropriate for a "2007-present" redirect to point to events from a decade ago. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Baker–Unity Highway No. 13

"Baker–Unity Highway" is mentioned at both targets. "No. 13" is mentioned nowhere, leaving the context confused. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bader–Ofer method

Not mentioned at either target. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is mentioned in D'Hondt method. – gpvos (talk)User:Gpvos 04:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bluster Kong

That section no longer exists. This character is mentioned exactly once in the whole article, and that mention is in passing. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Leaning keep, mentioned exactly once is still mentioned. I have changed the target section to the one that mentions the character. BD2412 T 17:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @BD2412: One mention in passing while talking about a different character would disappoint anyone who was trying to look up information about this character. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would read it as that being everything of encyclopedic value that there is to say about the character. BD2412 T 19:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I think the one mention is fine, a minor character which is related to the character the redirect leads to. I have also added sources to that section just in case it is flagged as unsourced. CaptainGalaxy 18:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: not sure dropping a reader into a search result with a mix of partial matches, this article, and Donkey Kong Country (TV series) (which the target section links to) is an improvement. Skynxnex (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as it stands this is a correctly-targeted redirect. If anyone were to add more information at any point, here is where they'd add it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Qazwsxedcrfvtgbyhnujmikolp

Per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Qazwsxedcrfvtgbyhnujmikolp, this requires a full discussion. @JayCubby, L293D, Robert McClenon, SmokeyJoe, Alalch E., Pppery, Matrix, Queen of Hearts, and NasssaNser: — pinging participants in the MfD discussion. BD2412 T 16:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Mentioned in the article. An alternative, non-standard, ostensibly wrong, rendition of the keyboard layout (going from top to bottom instead of from left to right), but it's a rendition. As a lexical item it exists. Not someting that we need to overthink. —Alalch E. 19:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Cheap. (Fwiw, Cubby's now glocked and blocked, so I don't think you're gonna get anything from them.) Queen of ♡ | speak 19:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: A lot of bored people in work/school (I would know) end up just mashing random key combinations. Also, As Alalch pointed out, this is still a rendition of the QWERTY layout. Just look at the pageviews for Qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm. Even if we divide that by 5, that's still ~30 page views/month, which is sizeable. Keep note that redirects are cheap. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 19:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This argument would make sense if the qwerty keyboard were called the qaz keyboard instead, but Qaz is about a village in Iran with no mention. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per Alalach, this is a firmly incorrect and non-standard rendition, but it is still a rendition of the qwerty keyboard. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 13:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my comment at the MfD. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - A stupid redirect, but not a misleading redirect, and redirects are cheap. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I think this is an unlikely search term and I can't find where this term is mentioned on the target article. I did a word search and nothing popped up. Liz Read! Talk! 03:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dougie (disambiguation)

The set index is not a disambiguation. I can only find Dougie as a dance, and Dougie (given name), but I can't find the 3rd. If you can't find the 3rd one, will this page be deleted or kept? 176.42.17.150 (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Dougie (given name) does not involve the dance, and does Dougie from Bluey count as 3rd? 176.42.17.150 (talk) 16:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If there's enough content to create a disambiguation page, that's certainly fine. If not, the redirect should be kept because the target provides a disambiguation-like function. - Eureka Lott 17:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • We generally avoid pointing Foo (disambiguation) titles to non-disambiguation pages. BD2412 T 17:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • We do point them at pages that "serve a disambiguation-like function" though, which anthroponymy pages do. Oops, I thought I removed this comment before saving — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivanvector (talk • contribs) 19:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore the separate disambiguation page at Dougie (disambiguation). It's the best solution out of no particularly good solutions. BD2412 T 17:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Eureka Lott. If Dougie is the only title needing disambiguation that is not a person or character's name, which seems to be the case, it's silly to have nearly-identical disambiguation and anthroponymy pages that only differ by that one link. Just add a hatnote or see-also to the existing list. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Ivanvector. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Should be treated as an average redirect from incorrect disambiguation. The correct disambiguator in the title "Dougie (given name)" is "given name", and the disambiguator "disambiguation" is incorrect. No need to add an irrelevant see also link or hatnote to the anthro list. Someone who is at "Foo (given name)" doesn't need to be directed to "Foo" that is not name-related (not a "related or comparable" topic).—Alalch E. 22:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • We actually need this to exist because there's a broken piece of software, which is used by a lot of people who disambiguate, that thinks links to "Dougie (given name)" need to be disambiguated, so they can at least pipe link this to avoid the software bug. --Joy (talk) 07:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpaceX Mars propellant plant

PROD'd by user:Ergzay, who states "Destination page no longer contains info regarding this and no page on Wikipedia exists for this. Best to return this to non-existence and let someone create it when it's needed." PROD can only be used on actual articles, so I'm moving this here as a courtesy. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 01:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't aware you couldn't use the template for this purpose. The documentation isn't very clear.
As to the matter at hand, even with the change in the redirect done by @N2e it still doesn't talk anything about a propellant plant. It looks like N2e did a bunch of editing to add some details quickly, but I'm not sure if this was just restoring old content that was previously deleted or not. It might get removed again given that that page has been pared down a ton from what it was because of low quality sourcing. Ergzay (talk) 02:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, propellant plant is mentioned and discussed at target. No other conflicting articles on Wikipedia according to nom, WP:CHEAP. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Interplanetary spaceflight#Propellant plant on a celestial body where the plant is actually discussed. A propellant plant is mentioned at the current target, but only in passing, and in such a manner that one would have to alreay know what it was to get anything useful from it (the kind of place a bluelink would be useful). A7V2 (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That target only has a passing mention of "SpaceX propellant plant", although it does go more in depth with propellant plants there. Going to the SpaceX specific article might be preferable for people that include "SpaceX" in the search term, although I don't mind either option. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was my interpretation (perhaps incorrect) that the section, while not written that well, was more or less entirely about the SpaceX plan. The last paragraph at least is entirely about it, not what I'd call a passing mention. A7V2 (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. SpaceX need for, and intent to place on Mars, propellant equipment is discussed at the target. There are clearly few details, but the notable SpaceX endeavor to build a Mars-capable large spacecraft is covered in hundreds of sources, and that spacecraft (now flying in a test program), will need the Mars-generated propellant to refill it on Mars making SpaceX discussion of the propellant facility also notable, as also shown by sources at the redirect target. N2e (talk) 10:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hornsea88

Unattributed WP:COPIES of Hornsea Pottery bizarrely changed to be exactly 8888 bytes long. Flounder fillet (talk) 15:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - "88" is neo-Nazi symbolism (H is the 8th letter of the alphabet, I'm not going to elaborate further) but it was a bot that got it to that size, not the user. Someone who knows what they're doing could have engineered that, but this seems more likely to be coincidence. Anyway, this is speediable per G12 as an unattributed copy of an article, and probably as an actual copyvio as well judging by the initial edit being the full HTML markup of some other website. It's also speediable per G5 as a creation by a blocked user (creator is an obvious sock of HornseaOfficial), and let's throw in U5 (misuse of Wikipedia as a web host) too. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paramount Television International Studios

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Per the outcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 3#Paramount Television International Studios, where incoming links were the hurdle straight after a page move, I've given it enough time for the actual targets and/or rdr targets to be sorted out. The reason or rationale is the same as its/the original listing. Intrisit (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goulash (magazine)

This is a local(?) satirical(?) magazine published by a boarding school. Zero standalone notability, existed as two sentences that were BLAR'd immediately into the school it was published from. No mention of "goulash" anywhere at the target page. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No mention No redirect. To be honest, I doubt if this magazine is even real. Couldn't find anything in Jstor and Gscholar Ca talk to me! 15:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it's probably real, honestly, but just so local that it has no electronic archives, as many a student magazine do 😅 Utopes (talk / cont) 22:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Community of Geometry Dash

Nothing about a "community" mentioned, very unlikely to be a search term. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muttering Idiot

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete per criterion G10. Without describing what this insult refers to at the target, this is an unreferenced personal attack on a living person. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 08:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned, non-neutral name. Somehow did not get eviscerated within the last 9 years, but my guess is that there might have used to be a mention at the target page to substantiate this insult redirect, in reference to one time that it was used to refer to Balls in 2012. Without mention at the target, this redirect is offensive and does not offer value. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Modmin

No mention of this term at the target article. Almost assuredly has a plethora of other uses outside of... just Fark. The portmanteau of "mod" and "admin" is likely to come up in a number of other more relevant contexts related to moderation and administration. Cautiously though, this term has zero mentions on all Wikipedia, so I'm hesitant to just "retargeting and calling it good". Utopes (talk / cont) 06:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mimoid

No mention of this novel feature(?), aspect? mentioned at the target article. Has three other mentions on Wikipedia in different contexts, also Mimoides exists with a number of subarticles on species. Not currently a useful redirect without context at the target. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was linking it to the wrong page it was supposed to link to Aniara, not Solaris (novel).Mechachleopteryx (talk)
That might be typical, but it is the lack of mention of the word Mimoid in the article that made me make the redirect. If someone searchs for the term, they will be lead to the article. The solution is to mention them in the Article as they were a critical part of the book.
I understand that the book was written in Swedish, so other translators might have used a different word. If someone finds a different word used, but it is still unique to Aniara, then they could make a redirect to the article, where a standard term can be referred on.
If someone encounters the concept, it is highly likely that it is from Aniara and yet without the redirect, neither human nor bot would know that the word is associated with the book, and since as far as I know it is not associated with another novel. I had not fully completed reading the story yet when I made the link.
My intention is to add further discussion to the article, using the word, but I hoped the redirect would help others find the article. I also think it is worthy of an article in its own right, so if someone is really ambitious they can turn it into an article.
It doesn't refer to the moth. The reasons you are giving are why I made the redirect.
I don't think I need to make a list of all of the alien races and species that have a page on wikipedia. In the case where it doesn't refer to a dictionary word or a concept used in other novels, then it should be uncontroversial.
The moth name is pronounced meemo-eedays not mimoids, if someone types Mimoid I assume they are searching for the concept from Aniara, and it right now similarity search leads to you to the moth, when the page you are looking for is Aniara.
I think I might have directed it to the wrong page, it was supposed to link to Aniara not Solaris (novel).
Mechachleopteryx (talk)

Mental gymnastics

I had to do some serious mental gymnastics to wrap my head around why this redirect exists. Sure, some people may perform mental gymnastics when "they're uncomfortable from their beliefs being inconsistent and contradictory". A similar idea I feel could be people perform the act of running to get from Point A to Point B, although that doesn't make the "running" a good redirect to "pathfinding". It's a singular mean to the end, and not everyone that has cognitive dissonance is "performing mental gymnastics", and not everyone that does mental gymnastics has cognitive dissonance. Example: I'm fairly sure I'm performing mental gymnastics right now in an attempt to jump through the logical hoops that went into this redirect, and I don't think I'm too uncomfortable from cognitive dissonance. I believe I've come to understand why, although I don't think it's a great end-all-be-all redirect that takes people to the right location at 100% intentions every time. To me, I feel like Convergent thinking or Divergent thinking are what I would have associated mental gymnastics with, i.e. following along with someone's thought process jumping through hoops with twists and turns to an eventual endpoint. Also, "mental gymnastics" is not mentioned at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft redirect to wiktionary Okmrman (talk) 16:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PanoramaMaker

There is no information about a panorama maker at the target stub, much less a brand called PanoramaMaker. Not currently a helpful redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TotalMedia Theatre

No mention of TotalMedia or TotalMedia Theatre at the target article. This is not a helpful redirect as there is no content about this subtopic, and the stub for ArcSoft does not help enlighten readers here. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MediaImpression

No mention of MediaImpression at the target page. Neither this, nor "ArcSoft MediaImpression" are useful redirects in the article's current state, as we have no information at the stub for this subtopic. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Though I don't remember creating the ArcSoft MediaImpression redirect, checking the history confirms that it was in the article at that time but was later removed.
Further checking backs up my guess that I most likely created it as an EXIF redirect for "software used".
In order to address this issue that is causing you concern, I have updated the article to mention it.
The redirect can now be left as-is or changed to ArcSoft#Products.
Ubcule (talk) 18:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manta (Unreal Tournament)

No character (?) that uses the name Manta appears at the target article; this does not appear to be a useful redirect in its current state. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it's a vehicle
still not mentioned, so do with the redirect what epic games did with the first unreal tournament in 2017. which is to say delete it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Man’s red fire / flower

Pretty confused by this redirect; neither the word "man's", nor the phrase "red fire" appear at the target article. Not sure why someone would type this instead of the very likely alternative of searching for just "Fire"; this title does not seem useful as a redirect. Neither have any links or mentions on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Interstellarity: can you give some context for these? They seem like nonsense. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 08:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ivanvector: Thanks for asking. These terms refer to fire from the movie The Jungle Book specifically from the song I Wanna Be Like You. If you don't think this is a good target for them, I could support retargeting them to The Jungle Book (1967 film) or I Wan'na Be Like You (The Monkey Song). I hope you understand. Interstellarity (talk) 12:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I know redirects are cheap, but this seems too trivial. What is the value of having this redirect, versus the (admittedly also minor) nuisance of having this title pop up in searches when it isn't relevant? --Trovatore (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also note that these contain curly quotes rather than standard apostrophes. Inclined to delete for that reason alone. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Pppery: I created redirects for these that have the correct apostrophes. Interstellarity (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A man has fallen into a river in Lego City

A meme not mentioned at the target article. For anyone that wanted to read about Lego City, Lego City is the perfectly natural search term. Prefacing it with the meme line from the Lego City commercial implies an interest in the man falling into the river in Lego City. Unfortunately, the man is nowhere to be found in the river, much as this line is nowhere to be found in the article. Not a helpful redirect in the article's current form. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Making televsion

Implausible typo for the unmentioned search term of "Making television", which is already a roundabout way of reaching the target article. Errors in "avoided double redirects" are even more unlikely than errors in a page's actual title, and the misspelling coupled with the "making" verb pretense makes this too far out to salvage. Making television didn't use to exist, this probably could have been moved with redirect suppression as the original was initially aired as implausible in its former state. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make Me A World

There is no mention of this imprint at the target article. "Make" and "A World" are not ever mentioned at the target article. As it stands, people who specifically search for the imprint instead of the publishing house itself are left without any context to the phrase that they typed in. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maha (cat)

There is no cat called "Maha" discussed at the target. Moreover, there is no character called Maha discussed there, or at the associated List of .hack characters. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magnetic air car

No mention of anything about a magnetic air car at the general-ish page for hybrid vehicles. As it stands, if people really wanted to search for hybrid vehicles, one would have used that search term outright. Specifying a magnetic air car and ending up at a page about hybrid vehicles in general is not a useful redirect for readers as it currently stands. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - there's an article in the history about a theoretical compressed-air vehicle which used a magnetic motor to compress the air for propulsion, rather than needing to be refuelled with compressed air. It was not a hybrid vehicle by our definition as it had only one source of power for propulsion. It also was never built: there was some hype about it about 10 years ago (around the same age as the article) and some patents filed, but then it vanished. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fucktarded

Salt evasion of Fucktard. Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I disagree that this is salt evasion, there was 5 years between the deletion of the salted title and the creation of the new one, and the creator never edited the original. The original page was salted because it was only being used for vandalism, while the new title was created explicitly with a target in mind. However, the term should be removed from the target: the one source given that's not paywalled happens to mention the word, but with no context other than an odd story about gluten sensitivity. Wikipedia is not censored but we are also not offensive for no reason; maybe Fucktard could be recreated as a Wiktionary redirect (wikt:fucktard exists) but this modified title should be deleted. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply - A source that is paywalled can still be a valid source. --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Yes of course it can, but I cannot verify it. My opinion is based on the information that I can verify. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Insurance goal

Not mentioned at the target page. Tea2min (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wiktionary redirect to wikt:insurance goal. There it's given in the context of soccer but it's the same meaning. Preferable to adding it back to the list of hockey terms since it also applies to other sports. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add back to the list, or delete per WP:REDYES for both the soccer/football and hockey terms. This search for "insurance goal on Wikipedia returns a surprising amount of articles that mention the phrase for its soccer/football and hockey uses, but surprisingly none of the results are articles that define the term. For this reason, the phrase seems notable enough in some regard to be included and defined either in an existent article or a standalone article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The term has not yet been added back to the list.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hockey bag

Not mentioned anymore at target page Glossary of ice hockey terms. (Which used to say "a duffel bag for hockey equipment" but was cleaned up in 2011.) Tea2min (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nikolas Macko

Macko is not listed at the page for this shooting. What I will note, is that looking up "Nikolas Macko", the shooting almost didn't come up on the first page (was the very last result for me)" This might make sense as it took place in 2007, and as time progresses, older results are less likely to be promoted higher. But in any event, we have no content on this individual. In 2007, they attempted to fend off the shooting from taking place. But, these efforts are not described anywhere on the page or on Wikipedia, to my understanding. I don't think that this is a particularly useful redirect, in the article's current state. Just as Google displays a wide assortment of topics related to different "Nikolas Macko"s, if he isn't discussed in the article any longer, I don't think this redirect is necessary either. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it should be worth noting, this redirect was fully protected almost IMMEDIATELY after creation in 2007, and remained fully protected for another 17 years up until just a month ago. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Utopes: Judging by the Google search results for "Nikolas Macko" "shooting", a mention could potentially be added to the article. What do you think? QuicoleJR (talk) 17:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QuicoleJR: I mean, it used to be a part of a pretty hefty section a long time back, during the revisions I checked in 2007. The shooting article was getting what looks like 1-2k edits every day during the timeline and immediate aftermath of the shooting (the article now has nearly 14k revisions). I have to imagine that Macko's segment was removed for a reason. The article was mainly talking about his eye-witness reporting. I don't really see a need to mention Macko, especially when looking at recent Google search results, the shooting is now really low. I don't want to force in his name into the article if it doesn't need to be. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lynn Thomas (That's So Raven)

No mention of a character called Lynn Thomas at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lower Quebec

No information about Lower Quebec at the target article. Doing a spot check for other locations around the world, I could not find Lower Foobar ever be a redirect to Foobar, as the specification of lower almost certainly implies a different, undiscussed topic. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look how they massacred my boy

This redirect is categorized as follows: A meme quotation from film and television, that is not mentioned at the article. Wikipedia is not an infinite compendium of unmentioned memes. Not a helpful redirect as people who want to read about The Godfather would search for The Godfather. Specifying a meme implies a search for specific content that we don't have on WP. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, how often do people search for films via quotes? Regardless a simple search engine search will tell them the film's title and they can search for the title from there. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long life motor oil

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. Withdrawn, thanks for the context and additional rcat! (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 03:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People searching for motor oil that is specifically long life are likely looking for material on a specific topic that we don't cover. Similarly to people who specify Ultra short-term memory, the "long life" qualifier seems to indicate an undiscussed unmentioned variant. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep - the target does discuss innovations meant to extend the service intervals for motor oils, and summarizes some information on types of motor oil engineered with long life as a consideration (e.g. synthetic oil), although it does not use the term "long life" at all. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (creator) "long-life" is mentioned (more than once) in motor oil at "(for example, BMW and VW with their respective long-life standards)", which undermines factual basis of nom. I'm also not sure if the nom's analogy helps as "Ultra short-term memory" or "ultra" isn't mentioned at Short-term memory. Widefox; talk 12:33, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly my point @Widefox:. Ultra wasn't mentioned in short-term memory, and the redirect was deleted as a result. In this case, I thought "Long life" wasn't mentioned either (hence why I brought up another unmentioned example). However, now it seems as if the version of "long-life" eluded me, so I was mistaken there. That said, I'm not seeing the "more than one" examples though; the example you talk about here is the only one I'm seeing (and is in reference to long-life standards, not motor oil, so I'm not super sure if it's likely yet). Utopes (talk / cont) 06:03, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, that long-life standards refers to the motor oil. Searching for "long": ...LL-98 (Long Life 1998) , but some synthetic oil suppliers suggest that the intervals between oil changes can be longer, sometimes as long..., may perform better for longer . The longevity of the oil, and marketing of it is obviously an important subtopic for readers, which can be improved in the article. Widefox; talk 12:45, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is not anything particularly unique about "long life motor oil" - it is very similar in composition to other oils within a similar viscosity grade. For example compare [2] and [3] - both are a mixture of "distillates (petroleum)" and "lubricating oils (petroleum)". Although one has "long life" in the name and the other doesn't, they are both advertised as "long engine life" on product pages, with no numbers to compare, so it's not even clear which one actually gives longer life. There is little to say in a discussion of "long life" oil beyond how meaningless a term it is and how manufacturers often come up with new marketing gimmicks. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 17:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've bumped the redirect tag to "R from subtopic", which seems better than the no mention, or my previous "with poss...". Widefox; talk 15:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Living foods diet

There's no context about the idea of "living foods" at the target article, and mentions across Wikipedia are rough all around. Indeed, Living foods is a red link as it stands as well. Without any further context about this particular diet, it does not serve as a very useful redirect in the meantime if readers are left looking for material we don't have, it seems. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:NEO - Google reveals many different diet fads trying to rebrand as "living foods", most of it pseudoscientific bunk. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Liquid nails

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Lower case version of what's apparently a brand of glue...? Adhesive? In any case, liquid nails are not mentioned at the target, and anyone typing this in instead of adhesive seems to be looking for something else. Has some history, but has also been to RfD before (13 years ago). Utopes (talk / cont) 05:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Yu-jeong (singer)

No singer with this name is discussed at the target article. Does not help to redirect here, suggesting content that we do not have. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:03, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Lightsum. Note that members of South Korean K-pop group rarely uses their full name in their promotion, it is always without the surname or a stage name. I created it before Lightsum was published in mainspace but forgotten to retarget. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 11:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leave The Light On (Johnny Orlando song)

No song with this title discussed at the target article, not a helpful redirect in its current state. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lamb Chop (The Sheep-Pig)

No character with this name discussed at the target article. Not helpful as a redirect in its current state. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Godiva syndrome

Lady Godiva is never mentioned or referred to at the target article. Redirect a hyper-specific reference to an apparent synonym where it never is talked about is not very helpful. People looking for exhibitionism would have gotten to that point through just searching Exhibitionism. The current title might just be more helpful pointed at Lady Godiva, if anything, as the presence of a name within the title makes it seem like the name is the most defining aspect. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of imagination

A lack of imagination isn't an "argument from ignorance". It's not being able to imagine and doesn't have to do with arguments. If anything, it's Aphantasia. However, this has been a redirect here for the last 21 years. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hlist1

The existence of this redirect implies that there are multiple {{hlist}} templates (e.g. {{hlist1}} and {{hlist2}}), but that is not the case. (And, as far as I can tell, has never been the case.) Delete as actively misleading. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 02:02, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as nom seems reasonable. Sdkb talk 03:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, not transcluded anywhere (only linked in page alerts related to this RfD, in {{hlist}}'s documentation, or in transclusions of the RfD page). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 11:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_18&oldid=1220373454"