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

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗ plicit 04:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Einmaleins → Multiplication table  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

WP:RLOTE; no affinity to German. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 20:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per WP:RLOTE. Bonoahx ( talk) 00:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom - this and the other RLOTE redirects below should have already been deleted per If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete. on WP:RGUIDE eviolite (talk) 14:28, 23 February 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 04:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Entier relatif → Integer  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

WP:RLOTE; no affinity to French. Target does mention entier with the generic meaning in a footnote regarding the etymology, but not this term. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 20:25, 15 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:30, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per WP:RLOTE. Bonoahx ( talk) 00:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RLOTE and WP:SNOWBALL. I don't understand why this has been relisted. D.Lazard ( talk) 09:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom - this and the other RLOTE redirects above and below should have already been deleted per If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete. on WP:RGUIDE eviolite (talk) 14:28, 23 February 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 04:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Schere, Stein, Papier → Rock paper scissors  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

WP:RLOTE; no affinity to Swedish. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 19:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Just to be precise, it is not Swedish, but German. No affinity to German, either. -- T*U ( talk) 15:43, 16 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I know, and I have no idea why I wrote Swedish, though it was likely a copy-paste error. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 18:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per WP:RLOTE. Bonoahx ( talk) 00:37, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per nom - this and the other RLOTE redirects above should have already been deleted per If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete. on WP:RGUIDE eviolite (talk) 14:28, 23 February 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 03:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Book II → Power Book II: Ghost  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Internet search results don't suggest that this is a common and unambiguous moniker for the target, delete unless evidence to the contrary can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Not a search term that is exclusively for the target. Neocorelight ( Talk) 23:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete as too ambiguous to attempt to disambiguate. Mdewman6 ( talk) 03:52, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to The Book 2 as a {{ R from incorrect spelling}} -- 65.92.246.142 ( talk) 14:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC) reply

That might make sense if it were The Book II, but targeting a term that could refer to so many different "Book II"s to something that specific will confuse and disappoint the vast majority of those searching the term. Mdewman6 ( talk) 17:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per Mdewman6. eviolite (talk) 22:50, 1 March 2022 (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 02:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706 → Pi  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

While this is a value of pi, it's an absurdly long value of pi to the level of implausibility. Tartar Torte 21:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• delete I can't see anyone seriously using this as a search target. Murray Langton ( talk) 21:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Why would this particular number of pi decimals be a rediract? It seems quite random. Or is this just the opening salvo in creating, say, five hundred redirects for other numbers of decimals of pi? Or indeed why a finite number of them at all? Bishonen | tålk 21:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC). reply
• Delete - implausible and not a helpful search term to anyone, being unwieldily long. eviolite (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Clearly delete (I had to zoom out for getting the edit button of the section). D.Lazard ( talk) 22:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete, I can't see any need for a redirect beyond 3.14159 but there seem to be redirects for up to 31 digits of pi then suddenly jumping to this many digits. Seems like that can of worms has already been opened before, but the redirect cited in this RfD is quite obviously too long. Bonoahx ( talk) 23:23, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• OMG. That's it, my absurdity quota for today is already filled by that can of worms, and it's only 9:30 AM here. Thanks for finding it, Bonoahx. Bishonen | tålk 08:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC). reply

• Delete. Too long to be plausible. AKK 700 05:44, 23 February 2022 (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 2030s. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Twenty thirty → English numerals  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This seems like a very implausible search term for english numerals. I cannot really seem to find any suitable target so I would say delete. Tartar Torte 20:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• The original target was Year pronunciation, now a redirect; recommend retarget to either 2030 ("twenty thirty" being how the pronunciation of 2030, a la twenty ten) or English numerals#Dates as the new target of Year pronunciation. (Although, 2030 is currently a redirect as well, so we'd have to re-retarget it when that article is created.) eviolite (talk) 21:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to 2030s and tag with {{ R from avoided double redirect}} so that it will be retargeted when an article is made at 2030. Mdewman6 ( talk) 03:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I like this a lot. I always forget about {{ R from avoided double redirect}}. Thanks! Tartar Torte 14:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget per User:Mdewman6. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 16:30, 23 February 2022 (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 02:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Jesuit friday → Thursday  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article or anywhere else on Wikipedia. A google search turns up nothing except false positives. 192.76.8.77 ( talk) 20:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Veverve ( talk) 20:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Does not appear to be a real phrase anywhere - search results appear to only be sports games against teams called Jesuit that occur on Friday. eviolite (talk) 20:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per WP:RDELETE#5, a Jesuit Friday is unsurprisingly a Friday, maybe it's some sort of obscure in-joke. Bonoahx ( talk) 23:28, 22 February 2022 (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 02:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Friday the 12th → Friday  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Left over from a piece of vandalism cleanup 14 years ago. Unlike Friday the 13th Friday the 12th isn't a real thing, and isn't a plausible way of searching for Friday. 192.76.8.77 ( talk) 20:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Veverve ( talk) 20:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete, silliness not mentioned at the target. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 16:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete. Redirect should've been deleted in 2008. AKK 700 01:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Wow, 14 years! 192.76.8.77, how did you discover this? Jay (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2022 (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 02:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Schimäre → Chimera  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Schimaere → Chimera  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Schimare → Chimera  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

These variations are not mentioned in the target page, which is a disambiguation page. Per the edit history of Schimäre, seems these redirects are a WP:FORRED issue. Steel1943 ( talk) 17:49, 22 February 2022 (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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:18, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

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

This redirect is only linked from the article Langelinie, which claims Langelinie and Esplanaden are nearby streets. The problem is that Esplanaden redirects to Esplanadi, a street in Helsinki, whereas the mention in Langelinie is about a completely different street in Copenhagen, which does not have its own article at the English Wikipedia. Therefore the current situation is obviously wrong. Perhaps the redirect should be deleted, or the wikilink at Langelinie should be removed, until we have an article about the street in Copenhagen. JIP | Talk 21:42, 8 February 2022 (UTC) reply

The Copenhagen street does indeed have an article at Esplanaden, Copenhagen, which I now have linked to in the Langelinie article. Concerning the redirect, I think it should be kept. "Esplanaden" is the name of the Helsinki main street in Swedish (and known by that name in many countries) and is mentioned in the lede and the infobox of the Esplanadi article. "For other use"-links to the article Esplanade may be needed, since there also is an Esplanade in Riga and several other cities, but I think the Helsinki street is the primary topic for "Esplanaden".-- T*U ( talk) 15:40, 9 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Disambiguate: as both Esplanadi and Esplanaden, Copenhagen are valid targets that people may be searching for. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 11:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A disambiguation draft will help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 16:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Disambiguate as drafted - if there is consensus to disambiguate, Esplanaden (disambiguation) should be made into a redirect and linked from Esplanade (disambiguation). eviolite (talk) 17:47, 22 February 2022 (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 Redistribution (election). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Redistricting → Redistricting in the United States  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Redistricting is not specific to the US. I'd suggest deleting this redirect until an article can be put in its place. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 11:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• While the concept of changing the boundaries of electoral districts is certainly not restricted to the United States, the primary topic for the term "redistricting" is overwhelming the process used in that country (even when excluding Wikipedia, US, USA, United States, and the names of about 10 states from my search term 100% of the results down to at least page 6 relate to the USA). I suggest to move target over redirect and add a hatnote to Boundary delimitation which is the global article (although not specific to elections) and/or Redistribution (election) which is the term used in Commonwealth and several other countries (if other terms are used we apparently don't have specific articles). Thryduulf ( talk) 12:35, 15 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete the main referent in the news at the moment in the US is the process in the US, but thereis no need for the redirect, and if we do not have articles for other countries, we should. (And a general article shouldbe written. Thisis not an adequate substitute). DGG ( talk ) 05:45, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

  We do have a general article - Redistribution (election) - that is already linked by a hatnote. The US is (as far as I can tell) the only country in the world to use the term "redistricting", articles about other countries exist at titles like Redistribution (Australia), Electoral district (Canada)#Boundary adjustment, Constituency Commission (Ireland) and Boundary Commissions (United Kingdom). Thryduulf ( talk) 12:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Redirect to redistribution (election). In the Philippines, "redistricting" is the term that is used. Another term is "reapportionment" which is the more formal term used in the actual law. Howard the Duck ( talk) 12:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep or move target over redirect (as per Thryduulf) – "redistricting" is specific to the U.S. – other terms are used for this process in other countries. (FTR, "reapportionment" is something else – it's not the same as redistricting.) The current redirect is fine, or move the article to this title. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 13:24, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Reapportionment and redistricting are used as if they're synonyms in the Philippines, or at the very least part of a single process. What's the difference? Apportionment (politics) refers to "the process by which seats in a legislative body are distributed among administrative divisions", while redistricting refers to "the process of drawing electoral district boundaries." Presumably you'd need to apportion first before you can redistrict, but they're part of a single process, at least in the Philippines where both terms (both refer to what happened to Cavite's congressional districts) are used. Presumably the correct target should be " boundary delimitation" as US state legislatures redistrict while the US Congress reapportions. Howard the Duck ( talk) 14:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply
    • Gah, redistribution (election) looks to be a subtype of boundary delimitation, while redistricting is the AmE term for the former. If this is case, and since redistricting is not just used on one country, perhaps my original suggestion of targeting to redistribution (election) is the best solution. (Compare special election redirecting to by-election; AFAIK there isn't a US-centric article about special elections as done in the U.S., but just lists.). Howard the Duck ( talk) 14:51, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply
    • The Philippines can easily be covered in a section at the same article, and can be spun-off into a related article if justified. But none of that argues in favor of either nuking the redirect or not moving the article to the base title – the term applies to two countries only, with the U.S. originating the process. -- IJBall ( contribs • talk) 17:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply
      • Redistribution (election)#Philippines and Redistribution (election)#United States already exist. Redistricting can be redirected to Redistribution (election), then just amend the lead saying that "redistricting" is the AmE term for "Redistribution" just as by-election starts with "A by-election, also known as a special election in the United States and the Philippines, or a bypoll in India...". Howard the Duck ( talk) 17:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There has been no action on the suggestion of amending the lead at Redistribution (election).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 15:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Redistribution (election) as it is the broader concept, and as per Howard the Duck. Veverve ( talk) 20:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget. Redistribution (election) makes a better target and is less US-centric. AKK 700 05:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Redistribution (election) per above. --- CX Zoom(^he/_him) ( ^{let's talk}| _contribs) 15:37, 26 February 2022 (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! 06:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Gaojia Huayuan Jialing River Transit Bridge → Gaojia Huayuan Jialing River Rail Transit Bridge  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Created in misspelled title and moved. No link-in. David Xuang ( talk) 05:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep The title is not misspelled but simply missing the word "rail", and it seems like a reasonable search term to me. Also, the article was at that title for about a month and redirects are cheap. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 16:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Mx. Granger. Tartar Torte 20:26, 22 February 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 13:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• Soumen Kumar Mondul → St. James' School (Kolkata)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Person not mentioned at target, or anywhere else. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 05:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Delete Quick Google, cant see anything WP:N about this person who isnt mentioned Happy Editing-- IAm Chaos 21:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Apparently, the vice-principal of the school, [1]. Not notable. Delete. --- CX Zoom(^he/_him) ( ^{let's talk}| _contribs) 15:34, 26 February 2022 (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. ✗ plicit 04:54, 1 March 2022 (UTC) reply

• William Patrick Gold → Wilbur Soot  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, potentially the target's full name but I was unable to verify it. Delete unless veracity can be confirmed with an RS. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• [2] lists a video producer named William Patrick Gold as a director of a company called Wilbursoot Limited, I think that's reliable but primary - I don't know if that is sufficient? Multiple sources that give the link seem to trace back to Wikipedia and/or IMDB (I don't know if one is/was sourced from the other or if they are independent) so are definitely not reliable. Thryduulf ( talk) 19:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 03:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. and because reliable sources are needed for BLP which is what it appears to be in this case. Veverve ( talk) 20:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Veverve and WP:BLP. eviolite (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2022 (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. (non-admin closure) 2pou ( talk) 16:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• The Colored Citizen → The Colored Citizen (Helena)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Delete redirect to make room for Draft:The Colored Citizen, a list article Evvekk ( talk) 02:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Also submitted at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. Not sure which approach has the better outcome. Evvekk ( talk) 03:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC) reply

•  Request withdrawn per discussion @ Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests Evvekk ( talk) 16:06, 22 February 2022 (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.