This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 4, 2020.
- 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
1665#January–June.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
04:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
The name "Margaret Porteous" is sometimes identified as the first person recorded to have died in the plague outbreak, but this trivia is not currently discussed in the article and has not been for a decade. Consequently, it is just a surprise dead-end for anyone who searches for this term. Unless the term "Margaret Porteous" can be added to the target article with acceptable sourcing, the redirect is useless and should be deleted.
50.248.234.77 (
talk)
22:36, 4 July 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
18:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
This redirect has a long history of being problematic. It was first created in September 2017 as a redirect to
iPhone X as a
{{
R from incorrect name}}. In October 2017, it was boldly retargeted to
iPhone, then subsequently retargeted back to
iPhone X as a result of
this November 2017 RfD. After another series of bold retargeting to
iPhone XR, the redirect
was deleted in an October 2018 RfD. It was recreated in September 2019 with
iPhone XS as the target, then deleted via
WP:G4.
In its current form, the redirect was
recreated again in October 2019 with
iPhone XS as the target. It was then boldly retargeted several times, variously to
iPhone#Models, a
now-deleted disambiguation page, and now currently to
iPhone SE (2nd generation). In my view, this redirect is inherently problematic because there is no phone called the iPhone 9, and a redirect to any one device may be confusing to readers. The one target I
may understand is
iPhone#Models, but I see no reason to diverge from the result of the October 2018 RfD that deleted this redirect.
Mz7 (
talk)
21:34, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
iPhone#Models. Given that there is an
iPhone 8 and an
iPhone 10 (albeit stylised
iPhone X) this is a very plausible search term - as the repeated recreations demonstrate. As there is no model by this name, we should point the searcher at the list so they can find the model they are interested in and/or learn that there was no model 9 rather than be left perplexed about why we don't have an article about it. The last RfD only had a delete outcome because nobody could agree which target was best but agreed it wasn't the then current one - that close was understandable but resulted in something that was clearly unsatisfactory and a bad deal for readers. After this discussion concludes, the redirect should be protected to prevent further undiscussed retargetting.
Thryduulf (
talk)
22:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete There is no such phone so I agree with Mz7 that any redirect is potentially misleading, even one to
iPhone#Models.
Pichpich (
talk)
22:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete - so such phone, quite misleading.
Ed6767
talk!
23:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Dab as there are many interpretations of this.
◊PRAHLAD
balaji (
M•T•A•
C) This message was left at
00:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete along with
Iphone 9, it's alt-capitalized sibling. --
ferret (
talk)
00:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- To all those !voting delete. This is consistently getting 250 hits a month. That's extremely high for a redirect and so very clearly this is something people are looking for. We obviously don't want an article on this topic so a redlink is the exact worst thing we can do for readers here - our job is to educate people and we don't do that by deleting the redirect and giving them (if they are lucky) unhelpful search results.
Thryduulf (
talk)
00:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
iPhone#Models or better yet to
List of iOS devices#iPhone. This is a plausible search term as Thryduulf has correctly pointed out and I don't understand how can someone get confused if this redirects to a list of models (where there is a clear description of each iPhone model). Also, we should avoid deleting this if it will eventually get recreated by some random user as it has many times in the past.
CycloneYoris
talk!
01:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget back to
IPhone X. Those who are finding for an "iPhone 9" are probably searching for the iPhone that succeeded the iPhone 8 series, which is iPhone X. I don't see how that is misleading or confusing, seeing that
Windows 9 redirects to
Windows 10. --
pandakekok9 (
talk) Junk the Philippine anti-terror law!
01:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The iPhone X actually wasn't the successor to the iPhone 8—in an unusual release, it was released alongside the iPhone 8. If you are looking for the successor to the iPhone 8, another candidate for that would be either
iPhone XS or
iPhone XR (both also released alongside each other), but this whole thing is so contrived and ambiguous that the best solution is most likely to just redirect to a list of all the models (
iPhone#Models) and let the reader decide what they're looking for.
Mz7 (
talk)
01:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete and salt. I appreciate the effort the nominator took to demonstrate how harmful the redirect has been over the years, especially since it was recreated. I see no reason to differ from the previous result, and I especially echo BDD's rationale there: "Incorrect name for several different topics. I'm not crazy about redirecting to the list section without further context; that seems to imply it's a valid name for at least one list item." --
Tavix (
talk)
00:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete I appreciate Tavix's highlighting of my previous argument, and I stand by it. --
BDD (
talk)
15:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom, harmful and misleading redirect (
t ·
c)
buidhe
23:30, 10 July 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 18#BatDR
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 13#Dachau
- 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.
King of ♥
♦
♣
♠
18:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This may or may not what the reader is looking for. We don't have a "
List of verbs" either.
1234qwer1234qwer4 (
talk)
15:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as ambiguous, it can mean adjectives, regular or irregular, in any language. Regards,
SONIC
678
15:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per
WP:XY. We are not
Appendix Probi
Oxford English Dictionary. --
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
15:46, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete or soft redirect. The closest to a broad list I can find at Wiktionary is
wikt:Adjectives by language, that's not really a good target for a soft redirect so I prefer deletion but I won't object to soft redirection.
Thryduulf (
talk)
16:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The Wiktionary link you suggest to soft redirect to is unavailable. Do you mean
wikt:Category:Adjectives by language? --
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
04:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- @
Soumya-8974: I do indeed, thanks for the correction.
Thryduulf (
talk)
12:54, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- delete as vague --
Lenticel (
talk)
00:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete,
Wikipedia is not a dictionary. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
00:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per above and as floccinaucinihilipilificatious.
Narky Blert (
talk)
07:07, 10 July 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
Internment.
(non-admin closure)
Mdaniels5757 (
talk)
21:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Too vague: could also refer to Gulags, Japanese internment in North America, Japanese concentration camps, etc. Not a commonly searched term so I don't see the value in disambiguation.
b
uidh
e
05:04, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- I think there's enough here for a
BCA, but for now a disambiguation page is probably the best option (
the pageviews are decent for a redirect).
List of concentration and internment camps would be of value if split chronologically rather than country-wise (perhaps there's value in having two lists there). —
J947 ‡
message ⁓
edits
05:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate per J947. --
Soumya-8974
talk
contribs
subpages
07:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
concentration camps. A scholar, whose name I am blocking on, did an authoritative history of the term concentration camp. I am not sure Gulags meet the definition, but all the allied camps where foreigners from hostile countries were rounded up did meet the definition of a concentration camp. Rounded up and confined, without charge, makes it a concentration camp, so the camps for Americans and Canadians of Japanese descent were concentration camps.
Geo Swan (
talk)
14:15, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
concentration camps, as the most suitable. --
K.e.coffman (
talk)
04:13, 27 June 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 15#Magwayen
- 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
William III of England. --
JHunterJ (
talk)
13:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Multiple nomination: will merge with
King William IV Merge failed due to multiple edit conflicts; will discuss separately
Certes (
talk)
12:31, 4 July 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
Henry VII of England. --
JHunterJ (
talk)
13:18, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Multiple nomination: will merge with
King William IV Merge failed due to multiple edit conflicts; will discuss separately
Certes (
talk)
12:31, 4 July 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
Henry VI of England. --
JHunterJ (
talk)
13:14, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Multiple nomination: will merge with
King William IV Merge failed due to multiple edit conflicts; will discuss separately
Certes (
talk)
12:31, 4 July 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 keep. I am withdrawing the nomination because the main interested parties agree on the current target.
(non-admin closure)
Certes (
talk)
13:49, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Multiple nomination: will merge with
King William IV Merge failed due to multiple edit conflicts; will discuss separately
Certes (
talk)
12:31, 4 July 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 keep. I am withdrawing the nomination.
(non-admin closure)
Interstellarity (
talk)
12:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
I think this should be retargeted to the dab page because the dab page has no primary topic.
Interstellarity (
talk)
12:04, 4 July 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
20:32, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:25, 4 July 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.
WP:SNOW.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
18:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:24, 4 July 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.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
00:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:23, 4 July 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.
List of Stockholm Metro Stations
- 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.
WP:SNOW. I see no reason to prolong this discussion any further.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
04:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:22, 4 July 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.
WP:SNOW Plausible search term and consensus is overwhelmingly clear.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
18:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep; this is a reasonable synonym/search term.
AlgaeGraphix (
talk)
12:35, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. English WP permits Americanisms.
Narky Blert (
talk)
13:02, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep, this is reasonable and helpful. /
Julle (
talk)
14:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep, a perfect example of a good engvar redirect.
Thryduulf (
talk)
16:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep, at present 5 articles (excluding user/talk/this page) link to the redirect. Change these links before suggesting deletion.--
BIL (
talk)
17:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Transportation would be the proper form in some variants of English.
Hog Farm
Bacon
23:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep plausible synonym --
Lenticel (
talk)
12:42, 5 July 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.
WP:SNOW. Consensus is sufficiently clear.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
04:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
This was set up by a socket puppet who vandalised and changed the names various Swedish transport related wikipages.
Devokewater (
talk)
11:18, 4 July 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. It's probably closer to a "no consensus" for
Patriarchate of Rome, but the result remains the same. --
Tavix (
talk)
14:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Should these go to the same place, or is the current setup good? The Pope is the Patriarch of Rome, and the Holy See includes his ecclesiastical sphere, but it's a good deal "larger" than that, both geographically (the
Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the
Melkite Catholic Patriarchate of Antioch are subject to the Pope, not coëval with him) and in scope (the Holy See functions as a state under international law, not merely as an ecclesiastical jurisdiction). Since the patriarchate is basically just ecclesiastical (nobody cares about Francis-as-patriarch except in an ecclesiastical sense), I'm wondering if we'd do better to send both to the Pope article. Or if it is important to keep the Patriarchate redirect where it is, maybe because the title of Patriarch isn't as common anymore, i.e. it's more historical, should we change the Patriarch redirect to match? But then, it is a title of the Pope. So...I'm rather confused here, and that's why I brought both to RFD instead of being bold :-)
Nyttend backup (
talk)
17:39, 19 June 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
20:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
The article does not indicate that this Bermudan footballer is know as "Zico" rather than "Zeiko", and a Google search shows a Cayman Islands footballer called "Zico Lewis" who seems like a different person. Unless this ambiguity is resolved I suggest delete.
Shhhnotsoloud (
talk)
09:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Note: This discussion has been included in
WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.
Giant
Snowman
10:01, 5 July 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 keep. Withdrawn per nominator.
(non-admin closure)
CycloneYoris
talk!
17:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Bilaspur is a fictional village where the film Mrityudand is set. However, there is an actual village called Belaspur or Bilaspur in Bihar, in
Mairwa (community development block); Google turns up evidence of its existence. Delete to remove confusion (especially among people who didn't realise they were living in a film).
Note to closer. Please {{
ping}} me if the result is delete - there will be some cleaning up to do in at least three articles.
Narky Blert (
talk)
08:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Withdraw. I think I may have worked out a way of fixing everything without needing to do anything exotic. I'll be back, or not, after I've thought it through completely and tried it.
Narky Blert (
talk)
21:33, 4 July 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
State University of New York#Athletics.
(non-admin closure)
Steel1943 (
talk)
16:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Delete as both an unlikely search term for readers and an unlikely target (13 SUNY institutions have football teams, including 4 Division I teams, so it's very unclear why this one specific institution is highlighted).
ElKevbo (
talk)
03:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
Delete Ambiguous. Multiple schools in the SUNY system have football teams.
Hog Farm (
talk)
05:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate, since multiple schools in the SUNY system have football teams.
Nyttend (
talk)
12:37, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
Disambiguate same issue as another RfD. --
Micky (
talk) 22:34, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
WP:SOCKSTRIKE --
Mdaniels5757 (
talk)
21:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate Distinguish between D1 SUNY football teams. --
Yankees999 (
talk)
23:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom, implausible search term redirecting makes as much since as redirecting University of California system football to Cal, UCLA, UC Davis etc.–
UCO2009bluejay (
talk)
11:23, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- I would be okay with this result, as well.
Ejgreen77 (
talk)
05:46, 2 July 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.
Space programme of the United States
- 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
Otokonoko. I'll hatnote for the swimmer. --
BDD (
talk)
19:35, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
These terms appear to have at one point been added to the target, but have since been contested and removed by
AngusWOOF. I don't have an opinion on whether they should be included at the target, but unless we have a consensus to include it there, the redirects should be deleted. signed,
Rosguill
talk
19:21, 26 June 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 mixed. Clear consensus to delete the ones with accents, no consensus for the ones that Sonic678 argued "weak keep" for. An implicit delete vote from nom coupled with an "unsure" vote from the sole participant leads me to see a quorum for deletion for the remainder. signed,
Rosguill
talk
20:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
reply
Seems to be a
WP:RFOREIGN case.
1234qwer1234qwer4 (
talk)
19:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Also, delete the ones with accents per
WP:RFOREIGN. Unsure on the rest though. Regards,
SONIC
678
05:12, 27 June 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.