The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Antonio Stella bottom tile → Antonio Stradivari  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Delete as utter nonsense. 121.185.27.77 ( talk) 23:33, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 23:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply
• Speedy delete per WP:G1, WP:G3 may also apply, this seems to have arisen from some vandalism, see the target's talk page. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 03:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

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 deleted. done by User:Iridescent, if there are any objections, they should be addressed at WP:DRV. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 20:20, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Wikipedia:ACCEPTED → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Encyclopedic content  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Brand-new redirect with no established usage. It is a bad idea to use a non-specific term which can have zillion of meaning. Staszek Lem ( talk) 20:08, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Speedy deleted under WP:R3. There's no possibility that this is a valid redirect, since it's unlikely that the target page will actually be what someone searching on "accepted" is looking for (yes, they may be looking for "what types of article are accepted?", in which case WP:NOT is still the wrong target but at least makes some kind of sense, but they're equally likely to be looking for "what behavior is acceptable?", "how can I be accepted as an admin?", etc. Note: I haven't closed this thread yet, in case anyone really wants to take issue with this close; anyone passing by in more than 24 hours or so feel free to close it down. ‑  Iridescent 20:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Staszek Lem, you might notify all relevant parties next time. Sizeofint ( talk) 23:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Sizeofint, I don't really see anything stopping you from recreating the redirect, but I guess by now you must have realised that it is too vague to be useful. Unless there's some consideration that the rest of us aren't aware of? – Uanfala 23:55, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

There isn't, but I'm more concerned about the principle here. In some discussion such a consideration may exist and the creator should have the chance to state it during the deletion discussion rather than after the fact. Sizeofint ( talk) 00:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Well, in principle you should have been notified (provided you are the creator of the redirect), and in practice as well almost all of the time creators do get notified. Notwithstanding occasional exceptions (and apparently they sometimes come in a row), RfD tends to be, in my opinion, somewhat more principled (and rational) than most other formal discussion venues here. – Uanfala 00:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Sizeofint sorry neglected to notify. Staszek Lem ( talk) 00:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. It has been found that these pages are used and do actually get hits. It should also be noted that there are various other redirects with similar issues, though that is no reason to keep. Anarchyte ( work | talk) 08:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Democratic party USA) → Democratic Party (United States)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Democratic Party (United States → Democratic Party (United States)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

Unlikely search term without opening parentheses. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 09:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Update, added Democratic Party (United States as it is also unlikely without the closing parentheses. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 09:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep both. Especially for people searching on phones, you'd be surprised how often people unintentionally leave out a bracket. Democratic Party (United States in particular gets a small but very consistent stream of hits, too many to be accounted for by Google crawlers. ‑  Iridescent 20:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Except that the phone searcher can just type "democratic party united states" without any brackets and get the same thing. Or "us democrat" AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 20:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Neutral: I don't really like these redirects, but we kept Georgia (U.S. state some time ago. I think we should consider a broader discussion of this sort of thing instead of fighting back and forth over individual redirects. -- N Y Kevin 01:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC) reply
• Keep both. People don't just search for titles like these, they actually create links to them on a fairly frequent basis. This is a fairly common editor typo; I've done it myself. When these are flagged with {{ R from misspelling}}, they get reported on Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings, where they are easily fixed by me using my WP:POPUPS configuration. My vector.js exploits User:Anomie/linkclassifier to highlight these links in red (e.g., Democratic Party), as specified in my vector.css, so they can be quickly located. Unfortunately, I seem to be the only editor who regularly works the Wikipedia:Database reports/Linked misspellings list. When I do, the list shrinks. When I don't, it grows. So the question is whether these are more helpful if they actually link to the intended article, or are left as red links to an article that "doesn't exist and needs to be created". I don't have much confidence that these would be fixed any faster if they were left as red links. – wbm1058 ( talk) 15:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:19, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Technical problem → Patentable subject matter  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Delete. This redirect makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate other mentions via search. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete Vague, the first thing I thought of when I saw this was computer problems. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 09:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply
• delete could point to almost anything, well, technical. Mangoe ( talk) 13:40, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply
• Comment should this go to tech support? AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 15:36, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

No. Computer issues aren't the only kind of technical problems out there. Mangoe ( talk) 16:53, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete as vague then. We don't have technical issue or technical solution either. However, suggest creating a redirect for technical character to the patentable subject matter since it seems to be using that term a lot in that section. [1] AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 18:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep. It's a term of art for a requirement for patents to solve some kind of technical problem (e.g. [2]). ---- Patar knight - ^chat/ _{contributions} 18:36, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Most technical problems are not solved by patenting something. Mangoe ( talk) 13:46, 17 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:16, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Last name song korean → Song (Korean surname)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Unlikely search term. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 04:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 06:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

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 Kim Kardashian#Marriages as the only recommendation provided. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:16, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Kimye → Bart Baker  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Clearly this can't be the WP:PTOPIC for this search term. f e minist 22:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• It isn't discussed at Kim Kardashian, Kanye West, or the Supercouple article, the last of which redirects Brangelina. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 01:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply

As Tomkat goes to Tom Cruise, I recommend Redirect to Kim_Kardashian#Marriages since Kim's name is first on the list. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 02:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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

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 as unopposed. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC) reply

• Mediziner → Physician  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

WP:RFOREIGN general topic with no affinity for German. - CHAMPION ^{( talk) ( contributions) ( logs)} 02:20, 16 October 2017 (UTC) reply

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