Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 20: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Animals (2023 film): fix reply formatting
Line 87: Line 87:
*'''Delete''' as confusing, while plural and singular are often interchangeable "Animals" doesn't appear in either of the 2023 films named "Animal". '''[[User:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Green">Crouch, Swale</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Blue">talk</span>]]) 18:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as confusing, while plural and singular are often interchangeable "Animals" doesn't appear in either of the 2023 films named "Animal". '''[[User:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Green">Crouch, Swale</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Blue">talk</span>]]) 18:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />'''Relisting comment:''' Delete or retarget?<br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <small>[[User:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b>]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:purple">''talk!''</b>]]</sup> 20:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></p>
:<p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />'''Relisting comment:''' Delete or retarget?<br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <small>[[User:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b>]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:CycloneYoris|<b style="color:purple">''talk!''</b>]]</sup> 20:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></p>
::*'''Retarget''' to [[Animal (disambiguation)#Films]]. It's a reasonable error, but redirect to the disambig page per [[WP:XY]].
*'''Retarget''' to [[Animal (disambiguation)#Films]]. It's a reasonable error, but redirect to the disambig page per [[WP:XY]]. [[Special:Contributions/108.21.221.8|108.21.221.8]] ([[User talk:108.21.221.8|talk]]) 12:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
::[[Special:Contributions/108.21.221.8|108.21.221.8]] ([[User talk:108.21.221.8|talk]]) 12:29, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. There is no 2023 film entitled "Animals". [[User:Mdewman6|Mdewman6]] ([[User talk:Mdewman6|talk]]) 04:03, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. There is no 2023 film entitled "Animals". [[User:Mdewman6|Mdewman6]] ([[User talk:Mdewman6|talk]]) 04:03, 21 April 2024 (UTC)


Revision as of 19:05, 28 April 2024

April 20

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 20, 2024.

Royal tart

Should delete as to WP:FANCRUFT. BaduFerreira (talk) 17:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • As a redirect, this is valid. The concern of FANCRUFT may be taken up at the target article. Jay 💬 18:52, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 16:47, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Finite dimensional Hilbert spaces

The current target may be too technical for the search term. Alternatives could be Hilbert space or Euclidean space (or Euclidean space#Technical definition). Also note that the singular Finite dimensional Hilbert space, or the more correct hyphenations Finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces/Finite-dimensional Hilbert space do not currently exist. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pluri-

Pluri indeed means plural, but the current target is about grammatical person, and this prefix is used in other contexts (eg. plurinational, plurisexual, etc.) and it's not mentioned in the target page either. It could be dabified in line with multi. --MikutoH talk! 22:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cocklass

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling, and web search only shows a bunch of unrelated results. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. might as well mark it up for speedy delete since it's such an implausible error Okmrman (talk) 22:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete per nom (it's pronounced in such a way that the k wouldn't make sense), and don't retarget it to futanari either, they're completely different things cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:17, 22 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).

Six word story

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 12:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it's the first six-word story but I don't think that when people refer to six word stories, they specifically refer to this one. Maybe retarget to flash fiction or Six-Word Memoirs. Okmrman (talk) 20:09, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as ambiguous, let the search results do the rest. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:23, 25 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).

Jake the Jailbird

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 Mr. Monopoly#History. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 03:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Mr. Monopoly#History, which mentions the name-- In the book, all of the characters that appear on the Monopoly board or within the decks of cards received a name. Uncle Pennybags' full name was given as Milburn Pennybags, the character "In Jail" is named "Jake, the Jailbird", and the police officer on Go to Jail is named "Officer Mallory". 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:37, 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! 20:07, 20 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).

List of deputy chief ministers of Puducherry

no such role exists or has existed -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:45, 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! 20:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I don't really see the point of redirecting it to List of current Indian deputy chief ministers, since there's no list of deputy chief ministers of Pudducherry there, either. -- asilvering (talk) 03:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is part of {{Deputy Chief Ministers of Indian states}}. So we either remove the entry from there, and have readers wonder why is Puducherry missing, or have it as unlinked. The non-link entry will provide the only information that a deputy CM is "Not established", whereas the proposed target adds some more. Jay 💬 07:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Animals (2023 film)

Should be retargeted to Animal (disambiguation)#Films, like Animal (film) currently, or be deleted. Per the above DAB there are two 2023 films called "Animal", so targeting one specifically is inappropriate. Additionally, neither (including the Indian film) seems to actually be called "Animals". Toadspike (talk) 16:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Animal (disambiguation)#Films - this seems plausible enough a typo that a redirect to the dab doesn't seem too out there. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 16:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as confusing, while plural and singular are often interchangeable "Animals" doesn't appear in either of the 2023 films named "Animal". Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:34, 14 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! 20:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Multistorey

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 Storey. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 03:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

pretty sure multistorey can refer to any building with multiple floors and not just car parks Okmrman (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Building for consistency with Multi-story. Not mentioned at target, but I can't imagine there's a more reasonable target. --NYKevin 04:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Welp, I was wrong. Storey, as suggested by Nyttend, is obviously a better target. --NYKevin 22:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to storey which explains the concept better than building. Multi-story can be retargeted there too. Nyttend (talk) 20:56, 22 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).

Unuk

Also Unuk River. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. Rivers are forever. --Викидим (talk) 19:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is there to even discuss? :) the only question I have in these cases is whether to execute the disambiguation by editing the redirect and replacing the formatting inline, or by first doing a move of the redirect to Unuk (surname) in order to seed the link for possible expansion later - the latter seems like a good idea usually (WP:BUILDTHEWEB). --Joy (talk) 12:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify per above. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

W2000

The first result I get when google searching is Walther WA 2000. There is also Hercules W-2000. Okmrman (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Hercules W-2000 as the most likely target, with a seealso link at top to Walther WA 2000. "W2000" to refer to the OS isn't really a thing to my knowledge. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 17:34, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flexes

Someone that performs a Flex, or perhaps are flexing (and/or doing the flexing (dance) all the while), can be said to be someone who "flexes". Flexion does not seem to be the only use for this term. Wiktionary or disambiguation might also be suitable here? Utopes (talk / cont) 23:21, 9 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.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per ip Okmrman (talk) 19:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to soft redirect to wikit per cyclone 104.7.152.180 (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to Wikt:flexes per nom, which seems to be a better option than retargeting to the dab (where no items are pluralized). CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My, my, this here Anakin guy

No mention of this lyric at the target page. Anakin never mentioned, people searching for this lyric instead of the title of the song are left without the context that was sought. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - "The Saga Begins" is Weird Al Yankovich's parody of "American Pie", with this lyric being the first bar of the chorus. It's a plausible search term given the name of the song never appears in the lyrics at all, to my knowledge. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 03:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep as {{R without mention}} / {{R from search term}}, being the first line of the chorus -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 04:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: per Jéské Couriano. Plausible search term. DrowssapSMM 13:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. In addition, tagging a redirect with {{R without mention}} places the redirect in a maintenance category, Category:Redirects to an article without mention, that is cleared by adding a mention to the target article, deleting the redirects via WP:CSD, or nominating the redirects for WP:RFD ... meaning tagging the redirect as so then "keeping" the redirect is akin to kicking the can down the road, which is unhelpful since we are literally having the discussion about the redirect right now. Steel1943 (talk) 14:00, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ordinarily I would agree with you, but this is an instance where people are more likely, if they didn't know the exact name of the song, to look up the lyric specifically due to thinking it's the title. As I mentioned, "The Saga Begins" never appears in the song as a lyric, while the redirect is the first line sung in the song's chorus. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 17:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So should every song have a redirect from the first line of the chorus if they don't know it? What if they don't know the first line, but they do know the second? What reliable sources allow us to verify that a song contains it's name in the chorus or not? Wikipedia is not the place to figure out names of songs from lyrics. Nobody uses Wikipedia for this purpose, because it doesn't work. How would people find this, from My my this here Anakin guy, or My my, this here Anakin guy, or My, My This Here Anakin Guy? It's a wholly unreliable metric. It would never be linked on any page (zero reason to wikilink a lyric). It would never appear on any page (as a lyric, it wouldn't appear anywhere else, and also not on the page unless we have encyclopedic content about the lyric). If you don't know the name of the song, you google search "My my this here anakin guy" and the very first result is The Saga Begins. This is not For the Longest Time where people might think that's the actual name of the song. Nobody actually thinks the song is actually called "My My This Here Anakin Guy" by Weird Al. This is would they'd type into their search engine, not Wikipedia. Typing this in a lyric into Wikipedia, under the pretense that it's not the name of the song, would be done so in order to find information directly pertinent to the lyric, and not to the song that they could've searched for in far less words. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This assumes that people aren't using Wikipedia as a search engine themselves. It can be assumed if they're looking up one of the more prominent lyrics for a song and that lyric isn't part of the song's title (which, usually, the song title is the most prominent lyric) then it's because they've heard the song but aren't aware the lyric they're looking up isn't the song title. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 18:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "This is would they'd type into their search engine, not Wikipedia" – people do use Wikipedia as a search engine. Special:Search is Wikipedia's second most viewed page (after the main page), with 2.5 million views per day. Kk.urban (talk) 22:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above and Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap. Ed [talk] [OMT] 18:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:44, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Most songs have lots of lines, so each one provides near-unlimited possibilities to create redirects. It is not up to us to judge which ones are memorable, unless this is stated in the text of article itself, with sources. --Викидим (talk) 19:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Many people may search for a song even if they don't know its title. In this case, the title isn't mentioned in the lyrics, so that's more plausible. The first line of the chorus is a very likely way to search for it. I believe that this can be useful even if the number of pageviews is low, because when people type it in the search bar, The Saga Begins will appear and they will likely click on that. Kk.urban (talk) 22:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. This is a plausible {{R from lyric}}, and I am not convinced by the arguments to delete on the basis of the lyric being unmentioned. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:58, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The One Piece is real!

Retarget either to Dark Fantasy (song)#Legacy or Patrick Fabian#Personal life as those sections both mention the subject, but the article it is redirecting to does not. 108.21.221.8 (talk) 23:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would like to state that the redirect is in fact a quote by the fictional character Whitebeard, which are his final words. This quote confirms that the One Piece (the treasure that the main character, Monkey D. Luffy, is looking for, and the namesake of the entire manga) exists. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 08:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List of One Piece characters#Edward Newgate and tag as R from Quote (perhaps tag it as an Avoided Double Redirect to Whitebeard, or don't, given Whitebeard is Newgate), as it is the primary topic-- both suggested targets by the IP editor discuss the phrase in the context of the same meme, which is in reference to the scene Jalapeño mentioned, and while doing so use the Whitebeard redirect to link there. The current entry on Edward Newgate also alludes to this phrase-- ...just before he proclaimed that the One Piece is real and that it indeed exists.
If it's felt to be necessary, hatnoting to Dark Fantasy#Legacy (This is about the character whose last words were, "The One Piece is real!" For the internet meme that uses this quote, information may be found at Dark Fantasy#Legacy or something along those lines) may be an option, although I can't make the same recommendation for Patrick Fabian-- someone looking for information on the meme itself probably wouldn't be looking for a random celebrity who was asked to read off multiple internet memes, only one of which was the One Piece meme. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk pages of the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per luna Okmrman (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Garv Sangwan

Not mentioned at target. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was originally an article with two inline citations. jlwoodwa, "not mentioned" isn't a criteria except when the redirect is "novel or very obscure synonym" per WP:RFD#DELETE. Since there's more than just the redirect in the page history, I wonder whether we should be considering whether the subject is notable per Wikipedia:Notability (sports), rather than just whether we want it to be redirected to this page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further opinion on the pre-redirect page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amc interview with the vampire

Redirects are not the same thing as search engines, this version seems unlikely to be directly linked. Mason (talk) 03:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep as a theoretically plausible search term, but I do concede that it doesn't seem to get much (any?) use. I mostly object to the implication behind nominator's assertion that "redirects are not the same thing as search engines", which implies that the vast majority of useful redirects need to be deleted. Not so. Redirects merely need to be useful to be kept, per WP:CHEAP. If WP:PANDORA has a use, and usually I say it doesn't, I'd say that this is a good case for it-- nominating redirects simply because they are things that people might type into a search box is not how we do things here, nor how we should do things here. Redirects based on things that honestly and plausibly might be typed into a search box is practically the definition of a good redirect. Fieari (talk) 06:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, because <channel name> <show name> is not an unusual or unreasonable title. This is the equivalent of specifying "Disney's Cinderella", when you want to make sure people know that you're talking about the famous film and not the generic fairy tale. In this case, it means "the version of the Interview with a Vampire franchise that was published by AMC (and not the book or the other ones)", and there's nothing wrong with that. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. This topic would not be specified this way on Wikipedia. We are not a search engine that accepts dubious variations on any topic as redirects. The carelessness through lack of any formatting, plus the creator being partially blocked as a result of their redirect creations, leads me to believe that this redirect is wholly unnecessary. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per #8 because "Amc interview with the vampire" verbatim is not found in the article. TarnishedPathtalk 13:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:35, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The capitalization is poor but it seems like a plausible search term.★Trekker (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajnibala

The redirect is for non-notable character not listed in the target article. The Google search returns many more relevant results that can be notable. Delete to avoid confusion. Alternatively, within Wikipedia, a plausible possible redirect is Saglikade Bombabomb where Rajnibala is a character. Викидим (talk) 05:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the pre-redirect page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 16:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Dwayne

This was speedy deleted as R3 claiming No mention of a Tim Dwayne in target article. Since the redirect was created in 2010 R3 doesn't apply, so I've undeleted and am sending to RfD. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:51, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete for being an extremely unlikely typo/misnomer. 108.21.221.8 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural: WP:DRV is the place for contesting or overturning speedy deletions. Unless the deleter Maile66 had agreed for the undeletion. Jay 💬 12:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - looking at the history on this, I was most likely deleting based on a request. I have no real opinion on which way this should go, so please handle as needed. — Maile (talk) 13:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes it was a CSD request by Red Director. @Pppery: What was the intent of this RfD, and do you have an opinion on the redirect being re-deleted? Jay 💬 08:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete'. The reason I nominated that way was that I was unfamiliar with how the process for unlikely redirects went for being deleted. I was auditing redirects for Poker players and I noticed that one. I did some research on Tim Dwayne and the name has no history with Tom Dwan that I could find. Red Director (talk) 13:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tape worm

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 Eucestoda. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eucestoda, as tapeworm redirects there. 108.21.221.8 (talk) 01:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eucestoda. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 07:35, 21 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_20&oldid=1221243351"