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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Warigi → List of Mario franchise characters#Waluigi  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Ambiguous(?) redirect that appears to have been made up by the author. Is not a likely typo for Waragi. Suggesting deletion. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 23:43, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment: This is likely a misspelling of "Waruigi," a portmanteau of " warui" (a Japanese word meaning "bad" or "inferior") and " Luigi", similar to how Wario was named. But, strangely, we don't have Waruigi... Regards, SONIC 678 01:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - I suppose that this was created by honest mistake, yes, but then it's not used anywhere and shouldn't be kept. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 20:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete unlikely typo.-- 69.157.252.96 ( talk) 02:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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)} 13:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Vete y chinga a tu madre → Spanish profanity  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Apparently is Spanish for "Go fuck your mother". This phrase is not used as an example at the target page, and while Wikipedia is not censored, we don't need to have redirects from any profane phrase someone can come up with. Hog Farm ( talk) 22:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom: we don't need redirects for every slang expression. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Just because Wikipedia isn't censored doesn't mean that we have to list every other insulting thing that gets made up. I agree. Deletion is absolutely the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 14:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep It points to the "Madre" section of the article. There are several examples there of suggestions of things people can do with their mothers. -- evrik ^{( talk)} 21:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete Chinga tu madre is the basic form in Mexico. Vete y chinga a tu madre is just one of the infinite amount of arbitrary sentences which you can form with it. -- MarioGom ( talk) 08:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• It hurts nothing to use them both. -- evrik ^{( talk)} 03:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• List of countries by number of internet users (redirects) → List of countries by number of Internet users  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

No matter how many internet users our countries have, this is another redirect that was left over from a page move to get its target away from incoming links back in 2015...and its history consists of fixing double redirects, blanking, and nominations aside from that. Not sure if it is still useful, as such. Regards, SONIC 678 21:25, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Housekeeping. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Useless. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 03:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete housekeeping. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

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

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

We don't need redirects from specific leet characters. The former is one of many questionable redirects by Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 21:13, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 23:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete both - These are useless. I agree. Deletion is absolutely the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 04:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

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

One copy will suffice for this non-standard punctuation mark (which is equivalent to ?!/!?, hence this is the nonsensical ?!?!/?!!?/!??!/!?!?). One of many questionable redirects created by Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 21:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Agreed. I see no reason to keep this. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 03:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

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

No particular affiliation with Greek; see also Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_May_12#Γεωγραφία for precedent for Greek loanwords. One of many questionable redirects created by Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I agree. This is inappropriate. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 03:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RFFL. Narky Blert ( talk) 09:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 .tt. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Mi.tt → Mitt Romney 2012 presidential campaign  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This was a domain name used in Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign. It's a different website now, but has old usage (some here. In my view there are two options: delete or retarget to .tt where it is mentioned, the latter of which I slighly favour to give readers some context. Noting that this was created by blocked user Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). —  J947 ^[cont] 20:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Retarget - I think that this should go to ' .tt'. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 13:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• C⃠ → Copyright symbol  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

An odd redirect combining a capital C with the obscure character U+20E0 ⃠ COMBINING ENCLOSING CIRCLE BACKSLASH, followed by a space. One of many questionable redirects created by blocked user Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. A scan of User talk:Kenny Strawn fills me with no confidence whatsoever as to the value of any of that editor's contributions, even on a stopped clock is right twice a day basis. That 2012 block looks like a very good one. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom, not helpful. I looked up the log of pages created by this user, and over 60% of them have been deleted. Almost all of the rest are listed on today's RFD log. Hog Farm ( talk) 22:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete, spoof and as already said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Maynard Friedman ( talk • contribs) 22:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - As stated above, this is just a bit of nonsense that ought to get deleted. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 11:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• It's a Public Domain Mark. There is now a symbol in Unicode (U+1F16E) but my phone shows it as blank or a box with a question mark and my laptop shows a box with the code 01F16E. I don't know if it's a useful redirect, but there isn't a space in it - it isn't possible to put one at the end as it just gets removed. Peter James ( talk) 22:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

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

WP:FORRED: No particular affiliation with the Spanish language. One of many questionable redirects created by blocked user Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I see no reason to keep this. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 21:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RFFL. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:38, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RFFL. Hog Farm ( talk) 21:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete makes sense. I could see a case if Bleach was invented in Spain or was invented by Spaniard but that is not the case here.-- 69.157.252.96 ( talk) 22:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• IDon't → Verizon Wireless#"There's A Map For That"  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Target section removed in November 2014, but still covered at Verizon Communications#There's a map for that. However, this is not mentioned there. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - The "iDon't" campaign doesn't appear to have been really notable and thus doesn't merit mentioning on the company's article. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 14:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Tra$h → California Redemption Value  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned at target, meaning not evident from Google search. One of many questionable redirects created by blocked user Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:24, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Obvious speedy delete. -- MarioGom ( talk) 20:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete. A Google search brings up a non-notable musician. Hog Farm ( talk) 20:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Hog Farm. —  J947 ^[cont] 20:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - As stated above, this has no worth and isn't worth keeping at all. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 18:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• /!\ → Exclamation mark#Warnings  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

I do not think that people searching for would try to recreate it in ASCII. It has received only 32 pageviews since records began. One of many questionable redirects created by blocked user Kenny Strawn ( talk · contribs). – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 20:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• I thought it was a road. Amusing, but worthless. Delete. -- MarioGom ( talk) 20:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Another one of this user's redirects is listed below at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 24#Hnrrep. Hog Farm ( talk) 20:44, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• I like it, but nevertheless delete. Has some usage but not enough and in fairly informal contexts. —  J947 ^[cont] 20:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 23:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Just another pointless redirect. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 17:08, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• List of Gamemaker games → GameMaker Studio  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

No such list on the target page. IceWelder [ ✉] 20:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom, and because "Gamemaker" is ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Agreed. As stated above, this isn't appropriate and shouldn't be kept. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 07:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Game Maker Archives → GameMaker  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target page. Quick Google shows no official usage. IceWelder [ ✉] 19:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom and because "Game Maker" is ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - I agree. We shouldn't keep this. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 14:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• O (star trek) → List of Star Trek races#Q  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Propose retarget as typo to Star Trek: The Q Continuum; a character named 0 is listed there. TheAwesome Hwyh 19:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Support redirect per nom. Her Pegship ( I'm listening) 21:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete. The character would appear to be 0 (Star Trek) (zero, not the letter), and the redirect is miscapitalised. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - As stated above, the character's name relates to the number zero, not to the aforementioned letter, and the redirect isn't capitalized properly either. Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 16:55, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 List of Star Trek races#Trill. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Trill symbiont → Dax (Star Trek)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Propose retarget to List of Star Trek races#Trill; Dax is not the only symbiont. TheAwesome Hwyh 19:25, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Support, as Trill (Star Trek) also redirects to the list rather than the character since this edit in 2018. There was no section on Trill in the list at the date when I created the nominated redirect. [1] – Fayenatic London 21:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Support Its current redirection made sense when a dedicated Trill article/section did not exist since it pointed to the most relevant existing article. Pointing to a now-existent dedicated article/section makes more sense. Matt18224 ( talk) 01:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Serum concentrations → Serology  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Somewhat misleading redirect. Serology is the study of antigens and antibodies in patient samples, and often this involves determining the serum concentration of an antibody. But you can determine the serum concentration of many other things, e.g. electrolytes, proteins, and drugs, which would not fall under the banner of serology. I considered retargeting this to blood test since a lot of common blood tests involve determining serum concentrations of something or other, but this term is not actually mentioned there so it might be confusing to the reader. Maybe delete? SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 19:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - The ambiguity makes deletion seem to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 17:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Hnrrep → Nigger#Other languages  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Unsure what this has to do with the target, Google translate indicates this isn't another language, and a Google search brings up results for a gamer's username and the string "Hnr. Rep.". Page creator was indeffed in 2012 for repeated vandalism. Hog Farm ( talk) 18:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete Seems like a mangled Cyrillic transcription (i.e. ниггер) of the word. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 18:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete - As stated above, this just seems to be a transcription error. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 19:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete; weird and mostly useless. ниггер isn't listed at the target. —  J947 ^[cont] 20:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Enwiki has nothing about "Hnrrep". Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 11:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 delete per WP:G7. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 20:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Ohannes Altonian → Oksen Ourfalian  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Ohannes Altawian → Oksen Ourfalian  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Oxen Altawian → Oksen Ourfalian  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Altawian is not the same player as Ourfalian. I was mistaken. Nehme₁₄₉₉ ( talk) 17:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 Help Yourself (Julian Lennon album). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Imaginary lines (song) → Tally Hall (band)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not listed at the target article — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 15:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Help Yourself (Julian Lennon album). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 12:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget - I agree that this should go to ' Help Yourself (Julian Lennon album)'. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 12:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 Imaginary line. (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 ( talk) 19:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Imaginary lines → Tally Hall (band)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not listed at the target article — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 14:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Imaginary line as a {{ r from plural}}. - Eureka Lott 20:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per Eureka Lott. Hog Farm ( talk) 20:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per EL. The capitalisation is wrong for a song per WP:TITLECASE. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per above; it's an album as well but imaginary line is the clear primary topic here. —  J947 ^[cont] 03:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • That album is mentioned on Wikipedia here, but I still think the geometric line is the primary topic – however, a hatnote may be merited, unsure on that regard. —  J947 ^[cont] 03:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget - I agree that this should go to ' Imaginary line'. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 04:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 回:Labyrinth. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Labyrinth (2020 song) → Tally Hall (band)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This song is not a 2020 song. — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 14:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Retarget - An exact match for this title is at 回:Labyrinth, a 2020 release that includes a song titled simply "Labyrinth". CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 18:30, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per CoffeeWithMarkets. Hog Farm ( talk) 20:53, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per CWM (noting the horrible article title: how am I supposed to type that?). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 12:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Coronavirus in india → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Coronavirus in India with proper capitalization currently exists and the consensus for Corona in X so far is saying to for sure delete the redirects with miscapitalization. OcelotCreeper ( talk) 14:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Weak keep per WP:RCHEAP. The problem with the "Corona in X" redirects is that they're somewhat ambiguous, and an ambiguous redirect with incorrect capitalization is doubly problematic. This redirect isn't ambiguous, though. Seems harmless to me. SpicyMilkBoy ( talk) 19:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Not ambiguous, and the miscapitalization isn't a big deal, especially since some users are conditioned by search engines to not bother with capitalization when searching. Hog Farm ( talk) 20:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep, nothing is to be gained from deleting this redirect. Has heaps of pageviews. —  J947 ^[cont] 20:38, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Search box autocompletes the correct capitalization anyway. -- MarioGom ( talk) 20:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • URL searching is a thing too; what is to be gained by deleting this redirect MarioGom? —  J947 ^[cont] 20:44, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Simple clutter when the correctly-capitalised version exists. Typing anything between 'coronavirus in india' and 'CORONAVIRUS IN INDIA' into the searchbox lands readers on exactly the same page. Why overcomplicate? Any redirect like this should be tagged {{ R from miscapitalisation}} and always corrected, so why have it? Narky Blert ( talk) 21:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  For exactly the same reason why don't delete every other {{ R from miscapitalisation}}: they are useful. Not everybody uses the internal search box, many people navigate by other methods which are case sensitive. Thryduulf ( talk) 09:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep per RCHEAP. Utopes _{( talk / cont)} 23:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Hog Farm. (Note to closer: the redirect wasn't tagged until now, so you may want to leave this open an extra day.) - Eureka Lott 00:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete as it is a miscapitalized clutter. -- Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 05:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep per WP:RCHEAP and others above. Some methods of searching Wikipedia are case sensitive, so deleting this would be harmful and bring exactly zero benefits. Thryduulf ( talk) 08:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep. It's getting around 20 hits/day and hurts nothing. Station1 ( talk) 22:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep - I don't think that there's any harm from keeping this. It seems, as stated above, to be genuinely helpful. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 06:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 no consensus. I'm not surprised that when two discussions of identical substance are merged, one with a clear "keep" and the other with a clear "delete" result, that it ends up without a consensus. I think we've established that while "Corona in X" is technically ambiguous (eg: describing the beer brand in these countries, other coronaviruses outside this pandemic), the current pandemic is the primary topic for these redirects.

I considered the possibility of a split result, that is to keep the correctly capitalized redirects and delete the miscapitalized ones. However, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 24#Coronavirus in india shows strong support that a simple miscapitalization does not produce a strong enough consensus to delete in and of itself.

I appreciate the lively debate and admire that it was able to stay civil. I also see that we even learned something about RCATs (thanks Uanfala!). Respectfully, -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 14:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Corona in Africa → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Africa  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in America → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Asia → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in Asia  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Australia → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Australia  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Brazil → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Brazil  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Canada → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Canada  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in China → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic in China  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in England → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United Kingdom  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Europe → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Europe  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Finland → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Finland  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in France → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in France  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Germany → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Germany  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in India → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Italy → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Italy  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Mexico → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Mexico  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in North America → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in North America  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Norway → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Norway  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Oceania → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Oceania  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Russia → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Russia  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in South America → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in South America  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in South Korea → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in South Korea  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Spain → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Spain  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in Sweden → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Sweden  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in norway → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Norway  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in sweden → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Sweden  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Corona in the United States → 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

According to the PrefixIndex, this is all "Corona in X" redirects that currently exist. Two RfD discussions found very different results for this class of redirects: first this RfD on March 30 found a consensus to delete, then this RfD on April 6 found consensus to keep. After a DRV to reconcile these divergent results, it has been decided to have a bundled discussion of all such redirects. Note that I am neutral unless I say otherwise. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 13:25, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment Pinging all accounts to have participated in any discussion to date: Rosguill, Wuerzele, Renerpho, OcelotCreeper, MarioGom, Hog Farm, J947, Steel1943, CoffeeWithMarkets, Narky Blert, Thryduulf, BEANS X2, Lepricavark, Another Believer, Puisque, Nyttend, Uanfala, Soumya-8974, Kusma, BDD, Randy Kryn, Rich Farmbrough, CFCF, King of Hearts, Smartyllama, Hobit, S Marshall, Robert McClenon, SmokeyJoe, Reyk, Hut 8.5, Thincat. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 13:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete Corona in norway and Corona in sweden as they are miscapitalized, neutral others. -- Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 13:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment: this is a hard one. Corona is a quite popular name for coronavirus in informal speech (not in WP:RS). However, it is a highly ambiguous term (see Corona). The degree of ambiguity depends on the geographic area. Corona in Mexico has some chances of referring to Corona (beer) ( NYT) / La Corona / Estadio Corona. Corona in the United States might as well refer to any toponym (see Corona#United States). On the other hand, these might be a minority in English language. There is definitely more ambiguity in Spanish, where Corona en España has low chances of being about coronavirus. Corona in Spain could be assumed to be about coronavirus, otherwise it would be Crown in Spain... I cannot make my mind, waiting for others' input. Anyway, delete all versions with miscapitalization (e.g. Corona in norway). -- MarioGom ( talk) 14:06, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all. Redirects that say coronavirus instead of corona already exist and people could mistaken corona for something else (it is unlikely but possible). OcelotCreeper ( talk) 14:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete, as the search function seems to work fine in most cases. >> BEANS X2 t 14:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment. I do find it weird though that one consensus was to delete while the other one said keep. Good idea pinging everyone involved in the previous discussions so we could get a better overall consensus. OcelotCreeper ( talk) 14:12, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• ( edit conflict) Keep all. Contrary to my !vote in the first of the previous RfDs, I now believe that these are all very plausible and highly useful search terms and the clear primary topic at the present time (which is when they need to be relevant to, the past is irrelevant now and the future is WP:CRYSTAL). In any cases where there are other targets then hatnotes can and should be used to direct readers to those locations (via dab pages if necessary). Thryduulf ( talk) 14:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all. The sheer multitude of things, objects and people known as corona sums up my thoughts. If a person has heard of corona, he/she is very likely to know the correct term coronavirus, so it's not too much to ask to type coronavirus in X in the seacrh box. -- Puisque ( talk) 14:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep. I'm in favour of deleting redirects if there's the slightest hint of ambiguity, but here you'd a need powerful imagination to be able to see it. Yes, "corona" is very ambiguous, but the phrase "corona in {Country name}", as a search term on wikipedia, definitely isn't. Yes, there are places in the US that are called "Corona", but "{place name} in {country name}' is never used as the title of an article or a redirect. Similarly, there's a band named "Corona" that is mostly based "in Italy", but no-one would ever expect "Corona in Italy" to refer to this band. On Wikipedai, "{X} in {Country}" is only used when X is a large class of objects or a significant social phenomenon, and no other meaning of "Corona" fits the bill here. Of course, duplicates can be deleted ( Corona in sweden is redundant to Corona in Sweden), and the whole situation may need to be examined in a year's time in case usage changes, but for now these redirects are clearly helpful. – Uanfala (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all as WP:NEOLOGISMs and WP:OR. A Google search for 'corona -coronavirus' turns up almost nothing at all relating to Covid-19; though "corona virus" appears a few times. These expressions are simply not in use outside Wikipedia, and we should not be creating them. Narky Blert ( talk) 15:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  • @ Narky Blert: I'm puzzled why you would search for 'corona -coronavirus'? That's a bit like searching for 'flu -influenza'. Do a Google News search. "Corona" is in widespread use in news media. Examples from today: https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2020/4/24/21235224/coronaviris-covid-19-pandemic-stay-at-home-orders-first-responders-john-fountain https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/coronavirus/woman-doctor-tests-positive-in-pathankot-6-more-corona-infected-in-rajpura-76122 https://www.livemint.com/news/india/govt-offices-move-from-5-day-weeks-to-working-24x7-11587751220449.html https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coping-with-corona-how-the-self-employed-are-managing-vkn562p3b (paywalled; headline is: "Coping with corona") https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes.com/bangalore/cover-story/how-the-food-business-is-reinventing-itself-for-life-after-corona/articleshow/75362337.cms https://www.thedailyherald.sx/islands/navy-ship-arrives-to-help-in-corona-crisis https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/3081419/love-time-corona-hong-kongs-dating-scene-slows-down-cautious-singles https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/corona-chronicles-tale-non-domestic-bliss-part-eight/ Care to reconsider? -- Andreas JN 466 10:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete all Given that Corona is a disambiguation page, I don't see how we can claim that one usage is the primary topic when it appears in a redirect. Hog Farm ( talk) 15:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Because although "Corona" is ambiguous, "Corona in X" is far less so. sam1370 ( talk) 01:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep "Corona" is a highly ambiguous term, yes, but we're not discussing "Corona", we're discussing "Corona in [country]", and I don't think that's an ambiguous term. Someone searching for "Corona in France" is almost certainly after information on the coronavirus pandemic in France, it's not likely that they're after French information on Corona (beer) or Stellar corona (the two most popular other usages). This is especially true now given that the coronavirus pandemic is a massive global news story of daily concern to almost everyone. Hut 8.5 16:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all ambiguous, as could easily refer to Corona beer in many of those countries. And not clear anyone ever uses "Corona in X" as a term. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 16:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete, concerns about ambiguity aside, these redirects crowd out more correct/complete search results that actually spell out "Coronavirus". I am skeptical that anyone that has followed these redirects would not have simply used "Coronavirus in X" had these redirects not been in the search results. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Comparing the pageviews for some of these, it looks like this may be the case, but I still can't find a pageview drop so big I can confirm it. OcelotCreeper ( talk) 17:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Just tag them as {{ R unprintworthy}} and the search engine will rank them down. – Uanfala (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC) corrected 21:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Uanfala, does that template work that way? If so I would strike my delete vote, but I don't see anything in the documentation about this feature. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  This was the effect I've observed, and it was my impression this was the main purpose of rcats nowadays. However, I can't claim that with full certainty, and mw:Extension:CirrusSearch doesn't mention it. – Uanfala (talk) 21:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC) -- I've just asked over at the village pump. – Uanfala (talk) 21:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Actually, I'm beginning to wonder, how do these redirects crwod out the correctly spelt ones? They shouldn't show unless you specifically search for "corona" as a word (rather than "coronavirus"). – Uanfala (talk) 13:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  In my experience, when I start typing "Corona..." it pops up with autocomplete suggestions that are all for "Corona in...". If you continue to spell out the word, you do eventually get the correct form. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  So the rcat turns out to be irrelevant for ranking. But I still don't see what you're seeing. When a type "Corona " in the search bar, all I see in the 10-item drop-down list are actual article titles like Corona, Coronavirus recession or Coronation. These redirects don't show up until I've added a space and typed the first letter of "in". – Uanfala (talk) 21:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Hm, I'm 99% sure that I originally saw crowding out behavior when these were nominated for the first time, but at this point I'm getting the same results as you. Striking vote, am now neutral. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Weak Keep All as the "least unlikely" meaning. If there are any specific plausible alternate meanings, use the {{ Redirect}} template in a hatnote. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:57, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Weak keep I think this isn't an unlikely search term, although it's possible that someone would be referring to the beer. Natureium ( talk) 19:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all Corona is the beer brand. Coronavirus is the virus. There is already enough information in the wild for people to know better. -- Hagnat ( talk) 19:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • "Corona" is ambiguous, but "Corona in <country>" has a very clear primary topic, and that primary topic is the virus. Whether you think people should know "better" than to use a common phrase to search Wikipedia is irrelevant - what matters is that they do use them, and they unambiguously use them to reach the current target. Thryduulf ( talk) 08:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep all per my previous arguments, Uanfala, Hut 8.5, and Thryduulf; redirects are very cheap and useless to delete. Personally I want to use these search strings as an easier way to get to the long-winded article names. This bangs the nail on its head: or searches of corona. It might not be quite enough to substantiate that right now the disease/pandemic is the clear primary topic here, but it's more than enough to substantiate that corona in [country] is clearly referring to the disease/pandemic.
  Remember that by far the primary usage of redirects is to help readers – and these redirect accomplish that perfectly. These may be deleted in a few years time, but right now they are oh so helpful in navigating our extremely long-winded article names. We are severly inconvieniencing readers if we delete these redirects, because the search pages are terrible. There are a lot of assertions in this discussion. R a w d a t a conveys so much more information and is a much more reliable source than opinions.
  We shouldn't delete the miscapitalised ones either; that would be useless to delete them. Sure – they are probably less used, less needed – but they aren't unused and unneeded. Why delete? —  J947 ^[cont] 20:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  Please provide WP:RS evidence of use of these expressions outside Wikipedia. Pageview numbers of WP:MADEUP expressions are far far worse than worthless. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:27, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  • Nope, that is quite simply unneeded. These redirects function as misnomers and as navigational tools; the helpfulness of these redirects is enough to sway a stab at RS. Bear in mind that that guideline starts with Wikipedia articles... There has still been no argument provided that these redirects are harmful, and it is very harmful to delete them as shown above. —  J947 ^[cont] 03:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  @ Narky Blert: Redirects are not articles. Pageview numbers of redirects are a reliable source for the numbers of people using the redirects. Thryduulf ( talk) 08:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep all. Full titles of these articles are a pain to type on a mobile phone. -- Andreas JN 466 22:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  FWIW, "Coronavirus in X" redirects exist for virtually all of these redirects, so it's not like delete voters intend to force people to precisely type out 2020 coronavirus pandemic in X for each of these. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:00, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  That's still increasing inconvenience for precisely zero benefit. Just because you don't think people should use these search terms doesn't mean they do not, or that they will not keep on doing so even if they are deleted. Thryduulf ( talk) 08:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• keep all I've been looking for an argument that I believed in, and Hut's argument is that. I think that "Corona" will mean different things for a while, but "Corona in Country X" will likely be clear for a long time. Hobit ( talk) 01:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all I can't see a convincing argument for keeping this short and incorrect term (which I haven't heard or seen used anywhere, myself). Surely everyone knows by know it's coronavirus? As per puisque above. Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 02:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • You mean there are no convincing arguments other than all the arguments detailing why these well used search terms are helpful to readers (the entire purpose of a redirect) and that deletion would be harmful? People might or might not know by now that it is "coronavirus", but that is irrelevant (and we should never assume that someone knows what they are looking up before they look it up). What matters is only that people are using these search terms to reach the current targets and nothing else. Thryduulf ( talk) 08:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Laterthanyouthink, there's dozens of examples of "corona" in today's news. If you scroll up a bit, I've posted links to a few. And there's loads more than those in Google news. -- Andreas JN 466 10:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all Due to the ambiguity, as per the aforementioned arguments. Maranello10 ( talk) 08:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep all due to them being very common names, not just slang. If it was "Rona in X" I'd say delete. --12:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Almaty ( talk • contribs)
• Delete All as Corona in X is ambiguous because erstwhile outbreaks on caused by Coronavirus do exist like SARS, and MERS. Hence, it would be incorrect to redirect to COVID19. SaiP ( talk) 17:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Ambiguity doesn't matter if there is a primary topic, which is the case here. If there is any actual confusion with existing articles then {{ redirect}} hatnotes can be used in the manner they are explicitly designed for and commonly used for on over 40,000 pages. However, I've yet to see any evidence of this confusion actually being a thing - SARS and MERS outbreaks are not commonly referred to as "Corona" whereas Covid-19 is. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Corona is being applied by the media to this specific outbreak, not to any other. It may be scientifically imprecise, but that's how language develops ... not every hoover is made by Hoover. -- Andreas JN 466 17:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep almost all. Corona in conjunction with a country will mean outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic in that country to the vast majority. Not only now, but also in the coming years. Only wehere there has been more than one outbreak of a Corona virus, like e.g. in China with SARS, the redirect should be replaced by a disambiguation page. -- Kohraa Mondel ( talk) 18:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Chinese coronavirus is already made. —  J947 ^[cont] 20:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep all. It's being used in news articles such as the ones linked above by another user, so it seems to be a fairly common slang term for the coronavirus. As for the ambiguity, I think that ambiguity exists with the Corona page, but far less people are going to be searching for "Corona in X" while meaning the type of beer. sam1370 ( talk) 01:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment. From today's news:
  • ABP Headline: Singapore University research claims Corona in India will end on 21 May.
  • Daily Star: "huge spread of corona in Bangladesh cannot be ruled out".
• Just saying ... Meanwhile, the Berlin Spectator has a series titled Corona in Germany. Etc. -- Andreas JN 466 17:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep all, currently likely search terms with reasonable use. Re-visit once the pandemic is no longer the dominant thing named Corona, which may take a few decades. — Kusma ( t· c) 12:28, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all, 'Corona' is slang, and with "Corona virus", Coronavirus", "COVID19", "COVID-19" there are surely already enough non-slang terms that readers will be able to find what they are looking for. ABR ( talk) 12:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Just because a term is slang is completely irrelevant to whether it is or is not a useful search term. It would be a violation of WP:NPOV for us to make value judgements about which terms people should or should not use to find our content. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all, "Corona" is what people abbreviate "coronavirus" to. The "virus" part is a especially important part. 3125A ^{Talk! _{Contributions!}} 17:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

  "Corona" is what people abbreviate "coronavirus" to in other words this is a useful search term and so should redirect to the coronavirus title. Thryduulf ( talk) 20:41, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep all, redirects are cheap and it's a reasonable set of search terms. Stifle ( talk) 11:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep all, this is a navigation aid, not an educational aid. And if it is seen as at all likely that a reader means "Corona (car) in Sweden" or "Corona (beer) in Sweden" - which seems a stretch - then they should be disambiguation pages. All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 13:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC). reply
  
• Keep (except those miscapitalized, norway/sweden). Whether you like it or not "corona" is used as shorthand for the corona virus as well as covid-19 and as such these are plausible and useful redirects. The "Corona in X" construction means that it is unlikely to be confused with any of the other uses of Corona. Sjö ( talk) 08:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Yellow dwarf colonization → Space colonization  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

A yellow dwarf is a type of star; it cannot be colonized because it is too hot. See also this RfD for Colonization of the Sun, and the previous RfD that retargeted this from Outer space and deleted 13 similar redirects. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 09:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Not all Earth analog planets orbit yellow dwarfs (see TRAPPIST-1), and proposals to colonise stars rather than planets are far-fetched. Narky Blert ( talk) 10:58, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete as an ambiguous reference, because it could be thought to be the colonization of the system of a yellow dwarf or of a yellow dwarf itself. We know that at least one yellow dwarf system is capable of supporting life. We can argue over whether we can colonize it, or whether it has colonized us. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete not a single search result that does not refer to Wikipedia. -- MarioGom ( talk) 20:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete most definitely. Spacemo80 ( talk) 00:41, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Senator Palpatine/Darth Sidious → Palpatine  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Implausible search term. Anarchyte ( talk • work) 07:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Agreed. UpdateNerd ( talk) 07:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I also don't think that this is worth keeping at all. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 10:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 -- JHunterJ ( talk) 11:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Hirono (surame) → Hirono (surname)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Suski (suranme) → Suski (surname)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Chomsky (surame) → Chomsky (surname)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Fajardo (surame) → Fajardo (surname)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Regardless of our surame surname, I'm not sure how plausible these misspellings are (they were left over from moves to the correct spelling). Regards, SONIC 678 04:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Drlete. Housekeeping; useless clutter. Narky Blert ( talk) 06:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete At least none of them is Suriname. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 09:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all - I agree. These seem utterly useless. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 10:07, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Dleete all Noobdy wuold be saerching for tohse nmaes. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 10:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all - as per nom. Joaquin008 ^{( talk)} 13:09, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Delete all—nothing important links there, barely any pageviews. Rotideypoc41352 ( talk · contribs) 21:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Sown – There is a clear consensus to delete these clutters. -- Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 05:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Unambiguous so totally useless to delete and deletion inconvieniences readers; see K4 and RHARMFUL. —  J947 ^[cont] 00:56, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment We do have {{ R from incorrect disambiguation}}. A few samples from Category:Redirects from incorrect disambiguation, not comprehensive:

1. Bowser (character, since 2014
2. Doctor Who (series 7)may, since 2013
3. Dongfeng(city), since 2007
4. (quite a few miscapitalized disambiguators)

If this discussion ends in deletion, the category needs a review, with an eye towards clarifing the usage criteria. Paradoctor ( talk) 12:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 His Dark Materials#Terminology. For future RfD discussions, note that it's both not necessary and often inadvertently disruptive to retarget redirects while the discussion is ongoing, but in this case it has not caused any issues. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC) reply

• Brytain → Great Britain  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Atomcraft → Particle physics  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

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

• Chthonic Railway → Underground railway  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Experimental theology → Physics  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Coal spirit → Petroleum  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

These are all in-universe definitions from the His Dark Materials trilogy. They should be deleted ASAP. Dan Bloch ( talk) 03:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

• Speedy retarget to His Dark Materials#Terminology, where mentioned and in-universe meaning explained. It's misleading to have them redirect from fictional concept names to real things, especially ones like experimental theology to physics. Hog Farm ( talk) 03:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

I could live with that, but there's also the issue of notability. These are barely notable in the books, let alone the real world. Dan Bloch ( talk)

• Retarget to His Dark Materials#Terminology. It is a very bad idea to point any of them at their real-world equivalents, which is the current position. However, that proposed target suffers from WP:EXCESSDETAIL and WP:FANCRUFT. It is very unlikely that a WP reader would come across such terminology outside HDM itself. IMO it could do with heavy pruning. Any redirects to no-longer-mentioned topics could then be put up for RFD. Narky Blert ( talk) 14:02, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment: I've retargeted them, although I still think they should be deleted. If it makes a difference, they were only created yesterday. Could someone reach out to me on my talk page as to what the next step is? Does this need to be kept open for a week? The documentation isn't helpful. Thanks. Dan Bloch ( talk) 17:50, 24 April 2020 (UTC) reply

As long as there is a list defining the terms, a {{ r to list entry}} is perfectly fine. Notability applies to articles only. Of course, if the redirected term isn't defined anywhere, the redirect can go, provided {{ r to article without mention}} doesn't apply. Paradoctor ( talk) 08:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC) reply

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