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 Israel (name). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

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

This is one of those things that can be right as well as wrong at the same time. While this is one of the Ashkenazi transliterations of the Hebrew word ישראל (another being Yisruel) it is rarely if ever used to connote the State of Israel, where it currently points to. I do not believe Yisroel is mentioned even once in the entire article. Ashkenazi Israelis (when using the proper name) call the country Yisrael, while Haredim might call it Medinas Yisroel (State of Israel) or even more commonly, Eretz Yisroel (Land of Israel). Yisroel as a search term is much more likely to be used to connote Israel (name), where one can find real-world examples of this usage, such as Yisroel Hopstein. And while some of the articles on that page have been subject to the roundabout of page moves between Israel/Yisrael/Yisroel (see this edit for one example of this) such a thing would never happen to the current target. Havradim leaf a message 23:51, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Israel (name) and n.b. that people named "Yisroel" are already listed there. I concur with nom's comments regarding the contextual usage of Yisroel (anecdotally, the only time I've heard/seen this used that wasn't someone's first name was by anti-Zionist Jews intentionally trying to distance invocations of biblical Israel from the modern state. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Israel (name) as per Rosguill. Veverve ( talk) 07:27, 1 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 Procedural close - the nominated page is not a redirect. A requested move discussion is already underway at Talk:TEAL#Requested move 27 January 2022. Thryduulf ( talk) 00:04, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• TEAL → Tasman Empire Airways Limited  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

All-capitalised form of of TEAL should be retarget to the Teal colour giving the universal meaning of the word to the colour than an airline. 182.1.230.42 ( talk) 23:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Procedural close TEAL is an article, not a redirect. You can propose moving it at WP:RM, but you should be aware of guidelines like WP:COMMONNAME (which may bar moving it to the long name) and WP:DIFFCAPS (which suggests that someone who deliberately types in all-caps is looking for an acronym and not the normally-cased dictionary word). 61.239.39.90 ( talk) 23:53, 27 January 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. ✗ plicit 06:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Giovanni Pagliari → Ataraxia (band)  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Encourage page creation Nehme ₁₄₉₉ 22:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Not a valid reason for deleting the redirect. Seems to be a helpful search term to get to a member of the band. Natg 19 ( talk) 23:09, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Natg 19. CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:52, 4 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! 02:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Barbara Levy, MD → Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Delete. Uncommon search term. It appears Levy was the former chairperson for this group, but has only a brief mention in the article currently. Natg 19 ( talk) 22:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Comment Barbara Levy redirects to Barbara Boxer (it's her maiden name), who is not an MD. If this redirect is kept then the hatnote on that article should be restored. Thryduulf ( talk) 23:25, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep It is enough that she is included in the article to make this a valid redirect. Havradim leaf a message 00:15, 28 January 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 procedural close - redirect converted to an article. This is without prejudice to an AfD if anyone desires. Thryduulf ( talk) 22:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Transport theorem → Rotating reference frame  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Should not be a redirect to Rotating reference frame. Proposing to delete the redirect. DVdm ( talk) 22:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Why? Rotating reference frame#Time derivatives in the two frames states "This result is also known as the transport theorem in analytical dynamics..." (italics in original). Although I note there also exists an article about Reynolds transport theorem. Thryduulf ( talk) 23:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Sure, the transport theorem is related to rotating reference frames, but there are many things related to RRFs. That's not a reason to create a bunch of redirects to RRF. - DVdm ( talk) 00:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Note: see WP:R#DELETE #10: "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." - DVdm ( talk) 09:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Ok, I created a small additional description of the transport theorem on the page. The redirect can be removed. Reynolds transport theorem is different, it deals with fluids and not with rotating reference frames. Teep111. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teep111 ( talk • contribs) 14:50, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Note: this entry can be closed. Redirect was transormed into article Transport theorem. Prodded article. - DVdm ( talk) 19:39, 29 January 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) 11:08, 29 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• DYK hall of fame → Wikipedia:Did you know/Hall of Fame  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This is a mainspace redirect to a page that was of relevance only to editors engaged with the DYK project - while DYK may be argued as having relevance to brand new editors, the meta page about the project does not. Further the page is long historical, having last been substantively edited in 2015 (according to the template) so any utility this redirect had to those who have not yet learned about namespaces has long since ended. Thryduulf ( talk) 20:23, 20 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete as a not needed WP:XNR. Tartar Torte 22:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete: the main space and the rest of Wikipedia should be kept separated. Veverve ( talk) 01:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete this unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 18:16, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete: the main space and the rest of WP should be kept separated. Veverve ( talk) 10:33, 29 January 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! 02:41, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• CAT:ATBS → Category:Articles to be split  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

• Cat:atbs → Category:Articles to be split  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

These articles are both little used pseudo-shortcut CAT redirects that are not listed at the page that they redirect to. Seeing that these pseudo-shortcut CATs aren't loved if not widely used, I'm proposing these for deletion. Tartar Torte 20:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep as a longstanding shortcut. The target category has included the link in its shortcut box since 2009, but last year, there was a small mistake in the coding when the box was was shifted into the template at the top of the page. I think it's fixed now. - Eureka Lott 02:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep - Keep per WP:CHEAP. I have used these redirects on numerous occasions to get to this page, and there is no reason to delete a redirect that has no higher use. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 03:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Eureka Lott, Jax 0677 and Wikipedia:XNS. Good, longstanding shortcuts to be retained by convention. P.I. Ellsworth -  ed.  ^put'r there  01:54, 30 January 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 Haitian Americans. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Haitians in Florida → Demographics of Florida  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Other than the mere-mention that Haitian Creole is spoken in Florida, not covered. Seems like a case of WP:R#DELETE #10. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Haitian Americans which talks about Florida extensively and has links to related articles such as Little Haiti and Haitian diaspora. Thryduulf ( talk) 19:51, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per Thryduulf. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 06:19, 29 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget per Thryduulf. -- Lenticel ^{( talk)} 01:14, 30 January 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 Move to RBI (disambiguation). Jay (talk) 15:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• RBI → Run batted in  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, this page should be retargeted to Reserve Bank of India instead of Run batted in. Page views of Reserve Bank of India far outnumbers page views of Run batted in by a ratio of 29:1 ( See here). This page had been subjected to edit warring in the past due to this very reason, but a RfD was never initiated. In 2009, consensus was established to the continue redirecting to Run batted in, but it needs to be noted that English Wikipedia intends to provide a worldwide view of topic rather than pay emphasis on American usage. Globally, Reserve Bank of India searches also outnumbers Run batted in on Google ( see here). In my opinion, at the very least, RBI (disambiguation) should be moved to RBI, and readers may choose which page they wish to visit. --- CX Zoom(^he/_him) ( ^{let's talk}| _contribs) 19:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Later note: (I learnt that per WP:GHITS, this doesn't count as great argument here, but please see this note only as a fact that in the Indian subcontinent RBI's primary topic is the Reserve Bank.) It appears that there are some concerns on whether RBI can actually be a primary topic for Reserve Bank of India. So, here's what a Google search on RBI looks like in India:

[1], [2], People also ask: (How can I get job in RBI?, What is RBI Grade B salary?, Which banks are under the RBI?, Which bank controls RBI?), Top Stories: ( [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]), [9], Map (A - R B I 40.0km Mayapur, West Bengal; B - RBI Zonal Training Centre 88.4km Kolkata, West Bengal, C - Reserve Bank of India 88.1km Kolkata, West Bengal), [10], [11], Related searches: (rbi complaint, rbi news, rbi is a which company, rbi exchange rate, rbi rates, rbi login, rbi recruitment, rbi deputy governor)

There are no mentions of baseball at all, literally zero. --- CX Zoom(^he/_him) ( ^{let's talk}| _contribs) 00:16, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Well, I live in the United States and this comes up right after the Reserve Bank of India page on my Google search. This is why WP:GHITS are not the best argument for deletion or move discussions. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 01:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

I believe there are a few things skewing CX Zoom's results. First, since he is searching from India, it makes sense that the Indian company would come up first on Google. Secondly, it is the MLB offseason, so there are less stories about baseball right now. Additionally, RBI is usually typically written as the plural form (RBIs). So if I combine all of those issues and search (from the USA) during baseball season (April to September 2021) for the plural form (RBIs), I get hits about baseball: [12].

That may seem like a lot of caveats, but RBI(s) is a prominent statistic used in baseball, so at the very minimum, this should be no primary topic (or primary topic in favor of the status quo). Natg 19 ( talk) 01:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Thanks for letting me know Muboshgu, I'm afraid I wasn't aware of WP:GHITS earlier. I'll give this a read. Thank you again. --- CX Zoom(^he/_him) ( ^{let's talk}| _contribs) 05:14, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to RBI (disambiguation) I do not think that "Reserve Bank of India" is the primary topic for "RBI". Special:WhatLinksHere/RBI shows a lot of baseball articles. I don't know why it's not pointing to RBI (disambiguation). –  Muboshgu ( talk) 21:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep Common term used in baseball. Would alternatively support targeting the dab moving the dab to "RBI". Struck original; Mdweman6 is correct - if there is no PT, the base name should host the dab page. Natg 19 ( talk) 23:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep for now. The bank is not the primary topic, but I agree there may be no primary topic. A requested move discussion could consider moving RBI (disambiguation) to RBI, but it is improper for the base name to be a redirect to the disambiguation page. If there is no primary topic, the base name should host the disambiguation page per WP:TWODABS, not be a redirect; a disambiguation page only carries the "(disambiguation)" qualifier if there is a primary topic, which is currently the case here. Mdewman6 ( talk) 23:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
  • I thought of moving "RBI (disambiguation)" to "RBI" as a potential solution after my vote. –  Muboshgu ( talk) 01:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to RBI (disambiguation) per Muboshgu. Veverve ( talk) 01:07, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Disambiguate: RBI is the primary topic for Reserve Bank of India in Indian context and Run batted in in the context of Baseball. While there is Baseball in India, RBI categorically doesn't refer to Baseball term [in Indian context]. This is where more than one topic exists as primary, thence disambiguate the base term "RBI" itself. If it is not preferred or an RM is required for the move, Retarget to RBI (disambiguation) — DaxServer ( talk · contribs) 09:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Close. RBI cannot redirect to RBI (disambiguation) because it would be WP:MALPLACED. What is really needed here is an WP:RM of RBI (disambiguation) to RBI on the basis of no primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 18:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
  • From a WP:NOTBURO perspective, I disagree that this RFD needs to be closed and a new RM needs to be opened. This discussion can suffice in determining whether there is a PT for RBI and if the dab page should be moved to RBI. Natg 19 ( talk) 19:09, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
  • @ Shhhnotsoloud: If today was the same day of the nomination and no one else had commented yet, I would agree with you. But now, with various comments and the fact that Talk:RBI (disambiguation) has been informed of this discussion, best to ride it out now... Steel1943 ( talk) 19:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
    • Very well – in which case my opinion is to Move RBI (disambiguation) to RBI. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 08:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep or repurpose - Keep, or repurpose to disambiguation page. -- Jax 0677 ( talk) 18:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Disambiguate (i.e., retarget to the disambiguation page or move the disambiguation page to this title). Redirecting to the baseball topic seems to be an example of WP:Systemic bias with a US-centered topic being treated as primary over an India-centered topic. I don't think a separate RM is needed; let's not add bureaucracy for its own sake. A notice of this discussion has been left at Talk:RBI (disambiguation) in case anyone wants to comment here. — Mx. Granger ( talk · contribs) 06:27, 29 January 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:30, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• SARS-CoV-2 Delmicron variant → SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Delmicron → SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• SARS-CoV-2 Demicron variant → SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Demicron → SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

There's some usage in non-reliable sources, but I can't find any RS usage. Typically misnomers can be okay redirects, but given how careful we need to be with medical-related information, I'd err on the side of deletion unless RS start using it. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete: as possible political propaganda. I am not here to favor one party or another but we do not keep non-neutral terms if they have no encyclopedic value (like this redirect). Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis 02:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Involved relist to add nomination for similar redirect(s)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Too ambiguous, googling the term seems to reveal the term is used in a small number of non-reliable sources and I'd think it's either as a reference to Democratic Party (United States) or Deltacron. The former per Aasim is potentially political propaganda and the latter is already a redirect to Omicron. Bonoahx ( talk) 21:11, 28 January 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) 02:56, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Partisan reprisal killings → Bleiburg repatriations  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Partisan pursuit of Nazi collaborators → Bleiburg repatriations  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

The core problem with this redirect is that "partisan" is too vague and does not necessarily refer to the Yugoslav partisans. Search "partisan reprisal killing(s)" in GScholar returns zero results, so this isn't an established term of art. Searching for just "partisan reprisals", the results are a mixed bag of articles about pretty much every partisan movement you can think of, and "reprisal", while in some cases referring to the executions at the end of WWII, is equally used to refer to various different military attacks by both Yugoslav and other partisan groups across a variety of contexts. Partisan pursuit of Nazi collaborators is slightly better in that it more clearly identifies a specific historical time period, but it's still not a term of art and could again equally refer to, say, Soviet or Jewish partisan attacks against people collaborating with the Nazis during the war.

Given that these aren't good titles for disambiguation, deletion seems like the way to go. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per problems described above. The titles are neither precise for the target article nor established. Doremo ( talk) 19:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• These were created from references in other articles, nobody cares if they go. If you want to do something actually meaningful, please help at Talk:Bleiburg repatriations to find an actually relevant name for the article. (I am somewhat annoyed at the idea that we conduct a whole meta analysis of sources for redirects, but don't do the same for the actual article title, which is not actually the most common name of the topic and is instead a compromise title created many years ago without too much debate.) -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:49, 27 January 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 No consensus.. However retargeting to Politics#Conflict and co-operation as a target better than the current one, Jay (talk) 14:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Political conflict → War  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 
• Political conflicts → War  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Clausewitz quotes aside, political conflict is not reducible to war, as it can include parliamentary disputes or other disagreements that are expressed non-violently. In principle, Politics may be an ok target, but given that a reader is unlikely to be satisfied by that result, deletion may be preferable. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:32, 1 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete as no suitable target. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 20:04, 1 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete: the scope of the redirect is way too broad. Veverve ( talk) 23:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Politics#Political conflict. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 20:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply

  I've removed that section, as it was entirely unreferenced except for a citation for a pithy quote by Carl von Clausewitz, which does not back the claims. It was also directly contradictory to the content at Politics#Conflict_and_co-operation, which could perhaps be a target, although I imagine that readers will probably not be satisfied with that result. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC) reply

  Fair enough. I am fine with Politics#Conflict and co-operation. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 18:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Politics#Conflict and co-operation. It's not a great target, but it's better than a redlink. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she/they) 04:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Aervanath ( talk) 02:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Politics#Conflict and co-operation per Tamzin. That may not be the best target, but it's still a better one than the current one. The same action should happen with Political conflict, which I'm adding here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonic678 ( talk • contribs) 19:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for the only reason that Political conflict was bundled quite late.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 19:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete Vague concept, better not to send readers to one particular place. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 17:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try for consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf ( talk) 12:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete Too general a concept. Definitely should not be targeting "war". Natg 19 ( talk) 23:17, 27 January 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 Ash-Shunah al-Janubiyah. Nom agrees with this target per discussion here: Talk:Shunet_Nimrin (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 22:48, 28 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Shunet Nimrin → Jordan Valley  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Shunet Nimrin redirects to Jordan Valley. Shunet Nimrin is an obsolete name for a place at the southern end of the Jordan Valley. Delete.

1. WRONG & MISLEADING. A small place is not identical with a long valley (over 100 km long), densely packed with important sites. The other way 'round, the Jordan Valley article has no mention of Shunet Nimrin, so one goes there and finds - nothing.
2. BLOCKING A NAME. The name is out of use. It seems to be in the area of modern South Shuneh/Shuna (Shuneh esh-Shamaliyeh), whose turn in getting an article will come soon, as Jordanian editors have been picking up pace. We already have North Shuneh, Tell Nimrin and many other related or nearby sites.
3. It was created in 2012, different times from now on Wiki. It is known from the context of the 1918 Second Transjordan attack on Shunet Nimrin and Es Salt, and from Britain or Australia, all of the Jordan Valley looked like a place at the other end of the world. Now we have a far higher density of sites covered there. Arminden ( talk) 20:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Comment: This nomination was moved from the previous day since neither was the redirect tagged, nor was {{ Rfd2}} used to make the nomination appear correctly. Steel1943 ( talk) 03:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete The main article does not offer information on this location. Dimadick ( talk) 03:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• RETARGET to Ash-Shunah al-Janubiyah. I identified the place from reliable sources, using Arminden's pointers. Loew Galitz ( talk) 03:11, 23 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 11:52, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Ash-Shunah al-Janubiyah per Loew Galitz. (I've actually been there!). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 18:30, 28 January 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 no consensus. ✗ plicit 11:38, 3 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Cretinism → Congenital iodine deficiency syndrome  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Per this article, Congenital hypothyroidism would be better target. 황동기시대 ( talk) 04:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:20, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• I just notified of this discussion at the talk pages of the creator, and the current and proposed targets. Although I do not know about the subject, Oppose for the only reason that two merge requests (in 2013 and 2016) were opposed at Talk:Congenital hypothyroidism. Jay (talk) 07:03, 3 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) 06:12, 3 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Scholars Press → Society of Biblical Literature  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

Scholars Press (SP) wrongly redirects to Society of Biblical Literature (SBL). It should be REMOVED. See arguments also at Talk:Scholars Press:

• "Scholars Press" was a US-based publishing house founded by a large consortium of academic societies. There were 30+ member institutions, with 20+ academic ones and another 10+ contributing money. The "Society of Biblical Literature" was one of many, not any more important than several others. The redirect to SBL was probably just a confusion, based on one single publication that happened to be SBL-related.
• All relevant details can be found here ( Pitts Theology Library, 100% RS).
• The editor who moved the redirect to SBL isn't active anymore. The one who created the redirect in the first place made a clear mistake, as he picked as target a German publisher named "Scholars' Press", with an 'apostrophe s', who has no connection to this one (there's even a 3rd publisher "Scholars' Press", in England, also irrelevant). I have pinged both editors from the talk-page.

Sorry, I haven't studied the templates here yet, nor the Twinkle shortcut, but the case is clear-cut. Thanks. Arminden ( talk) 01:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Note. The redirect was not tagged, but I've sorted that and added the template above. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:19, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Comment This was originally created as a redirect to VDM Publishing, which is now a redirect to OmniScriptum. That article has a hatnote ""Scholars' Press" redirects here. For the American publisher, see Society of Biblical Literature.". Scholars' Press (with apostrophe) is mentioned in the article as a subsidiary. It's also worth noting that the talk page discussion referred to in the nomination was initiated just 15 minutes before the nomination was listed here so there has been no opportunity for interested editors to contribute to it. Thryduulf ( talk) 14:25, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Thryduulf, thank you for helping out with technical matters. I had written the rest already, to save you & others from redoing the research: "Scholars Press was US-based... The editor who created the redirect made a clear mistake,...picked as target a German publisher...with an apostrophe... [The editor who] moved the redirect to SBL isn't active anymore." The latter stopped editing in August 2019, so waiting for a reply from him is hopeless. The similarly named German publisher has no connection whatsoever with the US publisher we're talking about here, and our colleague Yerevantsi, who created the redirect and who's an excellent Wiki contributor, was well-intentioned, but clearly made a mistake, he misidentified the publisher. As written above, there's even a 3rd, unconnected UK publisher - the name is generic, so it gets to be used repeatedly; Brits and Europeans respect the orthography using apostrophe s, the US institution chose to ignore it, which also helps with distinguishing the publisher we're talking about from any other. Plus see the clear description at the indicated Pitts Theology Library of Emory University, here. It's all there.

The real point is: the target, Society of Biblical Literature, is only one of MANY consortium members who created and supported Scholars Press. The link is misleading. One could as well redirect to ASOR or the c. one dozen (!) major universities who were equally important consortium members and providers of material published by SP. The redirect is a mistake, and it is misleading. It's like redirecting United Nations to USA. Needs to be removed. Thanks, Arminden ( talk) 14:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Delete per either WP:REDYES or the expression being too vague. Veverve ( talk) 12:02, 30 January 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC) reply

• Tim Apple → List of nicknames used by Donald Trump#Other people  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This should redirect to Tim Cook because I feel like that would be the article that more people would be looking for when they search that NW1223( ^{Howl at me}/ _{My hunts}) 23:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep - Redirect could potentially be ambiguous and it is not a name that has been used at all other than by Trump. Also, I am not sure if Tim Apple could really be considered a nickname used by Trump, I always understood that it was a gaffe rather than a genuine attempt at a nickname - that's probably a separate discussion though. Bonoahx ( talk) 22:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply

• Keep – a search suggests that the error is (unsurprisingly) limited to Trump, so anyone searching for the phrase is likely looking for information about Trump's usage of it. (For anyone else, Cook's article is only a click away.) I appreciate the gaffe vs. nickname distinction, but the target page's scope is a matter to be discussed on the target page: for now, the redirect delivers the reader to relevant content and thus is perfectly appropriate. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 07:18, 27 January 2022 (UTC) reply
• Keep Just a "nickname" used by Trump and not a common search term for Tim Cook himself. Tim Cook is listed at targeted section which is sufficient. Natg 19 ( talk) 23:24, 27 January 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.