July 5
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 5, 2024.
SportAccord
- SportAccord → Global Association of International Sports Federations ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
Removal/deletion of current redirect as it creates misleading impression. The redirect page reflects the name of a separate organization with its own initiatives whereas the target page reflects another organization that is now dissolved. In the current target page there's even a proposal on the Talk page from someone addressing this confusion. There should be a separate page and information about the redirect page of SportAccord JennyAnderson 2 ( talk) 14:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hard to say, maybe we can just rename that GAISF article again to be SportAccord? Notified both
WP:SPORTS and
WP:Switzerland.
Liuxinyu970226 (
talk)
03:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions.
JennyAnderson 2 (
talk)
09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, that's why that SportAccord has its own Wikidata item just because of entirely different entities, but then it meets own notability for separating? Liuxinyu970226 ( talk) 00:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions.
JennyAnderson 2 (
talk)
09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep since it is mentioned at the target, so I honestly see no reason for deletion. This is clearly a plausible redirect, and a valid {{ R from move}}. CycloneYoris talk! 21:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Garage Band (TV series)
- Garage Band (TV series) → Grojband ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- Garage band (TV series) → Grojband ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- GarageBand (TV series) → Grojband ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- Garageband (TV series) → Grojband ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
This TV series is not called "Garage Band". Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 09:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it's not called "Garage Band" but it's meant to be pronounced like "garage band", and it is the only TV show listed on Garage band (disambiguation). It's a plausible misspelling if someone has only heard the name of the show said vocally. BugGhost 🪲👻 10:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: as per BugGhost rationale. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Yellow plant
- Yellow plant → Heavy equipment ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
...because they're referred to as "plants" and are sometimes yellow? i don't get it. i'm not entirely sure if disambiguating or retargeting to a pre-existing disambiguation about something about things that are yellow and known as plants would be a better option than keeping or deleting, but will lean towards dabifying cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as vague -- Lenticel ( talk) 02:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Common term in UK and Ireland. Could be retargeted to Yellow goods (construction and agriculture). Stifle ( talk) 07:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Yellow goods (construction and agriculture) per Stifle. Tevildo ( talk) 12:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Rodentolepis
The target is a much-too-high-level taxon. I suggest deleting in order to avoid giving the impresion that we already have an article about this genus. Lophotrochozoa ( talk) 21:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete so Rodentoleptis, the existing, but misspelled, article for the genus can be moved to the correct name.— Ketil Trout ( <><!) 03:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Ketil Trout. Plantdrew ( talk) 20:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Furiosa Road
- Furiosa Road → Mad Max: Fury Road ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
Not sure how plausible this search term is but if kept, would Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga be a more appropriate target? मल्ल ( talk) 22:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as is I take you you didn't watch "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga", since that isn't a road movie. "Mad Max: Fury Road" is a road movie. "Furiosa Road" was a common nickname for the film when it was released. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] -- so is a good search term. -- 64.229.90.32 ( talk) 04:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
metal age
- The Metal Age → Thief II ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- Metal Age → Three-age system ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
different targets, and there's an article for the metal ages... which is itself divided into 3 ages, the last of which seems to be referred to as "the" metal age, even though they're grouped together because they're different metals. i'll vote for retargeting both of those to metal ages, unless someone actually knows their stuff cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at
Metal Age, then retarget
The Metal Age there. I guess I know some stuff, and it looks like "Metal Age" or "The Metal Age" (both singular) could refer to:
- The Metal Ages (Copper, Bronze, Iron) in the traditional three age system, collectively – but this is more of a turn of phrase than a formal period [6] [7] [8]
- The Metal Age in the prehistory of Southeast Asia – a specific, formal period (presumably because bronze and iron arrived there simultaneously) [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14]
- Hesiod's metallic ages (Gold, Silver, Bronze, Iron) [15] [16] [17]
- Thief II
- I don't see a primary topic amongst them and I'm also not sure about
Metal Ages as standalone article, there's not much to say about them collectively other than that they all involved metal. @
Iskandar323: What do you think? –
Joe (
talk)
07:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping Joe. I think they should both redirect to Metal Ages (though this should possibly move to the singular, both as best practice stylistically and apparently as the most common form in scholarship (
Ngrams)). While the page as is stubby, it's for lack of attention, not for lack of material. The scholarly literature using the conceptual period grouping is
considerable. The Metal Age in Southeast Asia might have a slightly different progression, but it is conceptually the same thing. Hesiod's idea within an idea mercifully has a quite different form. The Thief II title name is not something I think we need to be concerned with, any more than we need to disambiguate "resurrection" to account for the fourth installment of the Aliens franchise when directing to that topic. If a disambiguation page feels warranted, I would suggest linking to it with a hatnote from the Metal Ages page.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
09:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not too sure about combining the Metal Age of Southeast Asia and the "metal ages" of the rest of the world. In most of the Old World the Copper, Bronze, and Iron Ages are firmly distinct periods (the latter two being two of the original
three ages) and referring to them together as either "the metal age" or "the metal ages" is honestly something I'd never come across until today (though Google Scholar tells me
it happens). By contrast archaeologists of Southeast Asia consistently use it as a distinct, top-level period with the subdivisions
early, developed, and proto-historic rather than copper, bronze, and iron. So we could write
Metal Age Southeast Asia but not
Metal Age Europe or
Metal Age Southwest Asia because nobody really talks about that (instead we have
Bronze Age Europe,
Iron Age Europe). –
Joe (
talk)
10:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But it's somewhat academic at this point when a Metal Age of Southeast Asia page doesn't exist yet. I think the reason why the Metal Ages are emerging more and more as a reference point is because the three-age system is a bit dated and broken and underappreciates the major technology step of metallurgy. The stone age is also, in of itself, massive – comprising the paleolithic, mesolithic and neolithic, so it's generally pretty useless and unhelpful to group that with the bronze and iron ages, which are very distinct from the former. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not too sure about combining the Metal Age of Southeast Asia and the "metal ages" of the rest of the world. In most of the Old World the Copper, Bronze, and Iron Ages are firmly distinct periods (the latter two being two of the original
three ages) and referring to them together as either "the metal age" or "the metal ages" is honestly something I'd never come across until today (though Google Scholar tells me
it happens). By contrast archaeologists of Southeast Asia consistently use it as a distinct, top-level period with the subdivisions
early, developed, and proto-historic rather than copper, bronze, and iron. So we could write
Metal Age Southeast Asia but not
Metal Age Europe or
Metal Age Southwest Asia because nobody really talks about that (instead we have
Bronze Age Europe,
Iron Age Europe). –
Joe (
talk)
10:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping Joe. I think they should both redirect to Metal Ages (though this should possibly move to the singular, both as best practice stylistically and apparently as the most common form in scholarship (
Ngrams)). While the page as is stubby, it's for lack of attention, not for lack of material. The scholarly literature using the conceptual period grouping is
considerable. The Metal Age in Southeast Asia might have a slightly different progression, but it is conceptually the same thing. Hesiod's idea within an idea mercifully has a quite different form. The Thief II title name is not something I think we need to be concerned with, any more than we need to disambiguate "resurrection" to account for the fourth installment of the Aliens franchise when directing to that topic. If a disambiguation page feels warranted, I would suggest linking to it with a hatnote from the Metal Ages page.
Iskandar323 (
talk)
09:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Tristan Tate
- Tristan Tate → Andrew Tate ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
Delete as misleading. This redirect was created a minute after the second deletion discussion closed, first pointing to the whole article and then to a subsection concerning the Romanian case(s), on what seems to me to be the very good reason that they are different people. During the GA drive this change was reverted. As it stands, the references to Tristan are sprinkled throughout the article, so it's hard to pick a single place to point the redirect at; but they are different people, and the current outcome suggests that to the unwary they aren't. Given the AfD outcome, I would suggest that deletion of the redirect and reliance on how search engines actually work is the best resolution of this so that those looking will get a succinct and accurate answer; failing that, the AfD could be reconsidered, or Andrew Tate's article could be so structured as to give a redirect some place to point to. The current arrangement, though, treats him like Zaphod Beeblebrox's second head. Mangoe ( talk) 00:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment New RfD's go below the header, not above it. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 01:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re-target to
Andrew Tate#In Romania: 2022–present per
WP:BLP1E, where is he referenced under "Tate brothers" (that can be amended to "Tate and his brother Tristan" for first usage). 1E was the strong argument for deletion of the article second time around, despite not being mentioned in the closing summary, so redirecting to any other part of the article doesn't make sense based on his
notability. Additionally, a redirect that is used 20 times a day does appear useful, but being pointed at
Andrew Tate directly can be confusing for readers, even if he is mentioned from the lead onwards. I'm not sure why
TheMainLogan changed the redirect back in March. I'm otherwise convinced that this redirect existed long before March and that the page history is missing after the 2nd AfD, but could be wrong. Maybe an admin could clarify.
CNC (
talk)
01:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I won't even lie, I pointed the redirect at Andrew directly because they're basically the same guy. —
theMainLogan (
t•
c)
15:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- @
TheMainLogan yeah but in my opinion, they are not. Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different.
Mr Vili
talk
00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different." Then why shouldn't he have his own article? — theMainLogan ( t• c) 03:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- @
TheMainLogan yeah but in my opinion, they are not. Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different.
Mr Vili
talk
00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I won't even lie, I pointed the redirect at Andrew directly because they're basically the same guy. —
theMainLogan (
t•
c)
15:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and Restore Tristan Tate Draft I believe the redirect should be deleted, and Tristan Tate is notable enough to have his own page, I suggest the original page be undeleted, and converted into a Draft where further editing can be done to the original page in order to move it into mainspace
Mr Vili
talk
08:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- While this isn't the place to debate notability (the talk page would be better) the source assessment in the 2nd AfD demonstrated only one article with WP:SIGCOV, hence notability was not proven beyond BLP1E. Since this AfD he is now accused in a second investigation in the UK, but per the closing summary of that AfD, WP:PERP is still an issue here. Even if another draft is worked on, the mainspace article still requires a decision on either deleting, keeping or redirecting. CNC ( talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Refine to the section per CommunityNotesContributor. This is without prejudice to the former article content being worked on in draft, but unless and until an article is accepted (and such an article would need to demonstrate notability unrelated to the single incident) readers are better served by the redirect pointing to the content in his brother's article. Thryduulf ( talk) 10:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or Refine? Also, in response to CNC's queries, the page history is missing after the 2nd AfD because the article was deleted at the AfD, and the page created fresh as a redirect. Prior to deletion, the article was turned to a redirect to Andrew Tate for a short time per WP:TNT, and reverted within 3 hours.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Gallophone
- Gallophone → Geographical distribution of French speakers ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
Not mentioned in target. In the weird position of having a whole lot of online dictionaries claiming it means "French-speaking", starting with wikt:Gallophone, but I can't find a single such usage. Actual usage is rare but seems to be related to Gaul, not France or the French, e.g. Gallocentrism (thought I can't find a single one of its sources to check if they use the word that way). Rusalkii ( talk) 22:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Have you tried asking
wikt:WT:RFV about the Wiktionary entry? –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
00:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it does look like the original creator @
Thryduulf is an RfD regular, tagging them in to see if they have thoughts. (Sorry for dragging out decades-old pages!)
Rusalkii (
talk)
07:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are five quotations on the Wiktionary entry, all giving examples of use. I don't remember creating that (it was 2010) but the quotes have been there since start. A couple of minutes has found another three uses [18] [19] [20] on Google books and it can also be found in our Gallocentrism article . I also came across [21] and [22] which use the word with different meanings (the first possibly related to Galilee, the second is in the context of Welsh so I'd guess from Gaelic).
- Additionally, I'm seeing a few sources mentioning a Gallophone Records from the 1930s, with one that is probably not a reliable source, stating that it later became Gallo Records, but even if true this would be a partial title match. Thryduulf ( talk) 09:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rereading the initial post here, it's not unique in having a meaning related to France while being etymologically related to Gaul - wikt:Gallic being the most obvious. Thryduulf ( talk) 09:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it does look like the original creator @
Thryduulf is an RfD regular, tagging them in to see if they have thoughts. (Sorry for dragging out decades-old pages!)
Rusalkii (
talk)
07:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - The attestations provided by wiktionary, plus the additional mentioned above, are enough to a) determine that this is a plausible thing to search, and b) determine that the current target is appropriate. Fieari ( talk) 04:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Disidrose
Arbitrary non-English redirect (Portugues), subject unrelated to Portuguese or Portugal. — Alalch E. 13:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. This word does not occur anywhere on Wikipedia. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
JDX
Doesn't appear to be the primary topic for "JDX"; quick google gives "JDX Performance Golf Apparel", "Job Builder JDX", "Jobs and Employment Data Exchange", a racing company, an instagram artist, guitar amplifier, etc. I can't even find the radio station. Hard to create a disambig page because none of these have wikipedia pages. Rusalkii ( talk) 22:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per nom. BD2412 T 19:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Never mind primary topic say, I can't find anything worthy of this becoming a DAB page with nothing created anyway in terms of articles yet, after looking at this title's page history. And BD2412, it seems the nominator was suggesting titles of articles of note worthy topics now but not yet created even to be considered for this at the moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Intrisit ( talk • contribs) 17:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: draft provided. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 20:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Grand Duke of Hum redirects
- Sandalj Hranić, Grand Duke of Hum → Sandalj Hranić ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- Vlatko Vukovic, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
- Vlatko Vuković, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
Extension to bio's name in the article tile is misnomer in form of implausible noble title. ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 01:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Article leads specify that they are Grand Dukes (of Bosnia), and have holdings in Hum... heck, Vlatko is specified to be a Duke of Hum. Seems plausible to me that someone would mash the two facts together when searching for this person. A redirect doesn't have to be accurate, and mistakes and misunderstandings are perfectly acceptable reasons to have a redirect. The target is also unambiguous here. Doesn't really matter if there actually is a "Grand Duke" title for Hum or not. Fieari ( talk) 23:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- A cursory Google Books search for "grand duke of hum" and "veliki vojvoda humski" don't turn up these people, but it does turn up some other people, Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, Miroslav, Vojislav. Santasa99 what is the actual significance of this title, if any? -- Joy ( talk) 23:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, guys! Duke of Hum exists as a title, Grand Duke of Hum does not/did not, and there is very clear record about every known/recorded local nobleman and how he used to title himself - so no mystery there. In case of Vlatko Vuković and Sandalj Hranić they did not use title Duke of Hum either, they always signed themselves or were mentioned in charters as Grand Duke of Bosnia only. Many other local noblemen, even of lesser status than Vuković, Hranić, and later Vukčić (all members of Kosača clan) wore the Duke of Hum title - such as Sankovićs, Nikolićs, Vlatkovićs, etc. - simply there was no such title as Grand Duke of Hum, there was only Grand Duke of Bosnia as a title. Of all Kosača members, only Stjepan Vukčić wore both titles, the Duke of Hum and Grand Duke of Bosnia, and also Knez of Drina and of Primorje, and he almost always used full title. There was also nobility from earlier periods, but as far as I know nobility in pre-Bosnian medieval state era mostly wore title of knez (knyaz/prince) and župan. In short, title Grand Duke of Hum never existed.
౪ Santa ౪
99°
00:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should have said from Early Middle Ages instead of pre-Bosnian state. ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 00:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- You can see every single recorded title in Konkordancijski rjecnik cirilskih povelja srednjovjekovne Bosne. ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 00:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, guys! Duke of Hum exists as a title, Grand Duke of Hum does not/did not, and there is very clear record about every known/recorded local nobleman and how he used to title himself - so no mystery there. In case of Vlatko Vuković and Sandalj Hranić they did not use title Duke of Hum either, they always signed themselves or were mentioned in charters as Grand Duke of Bosnia only. Many other local noblemen, even of lesser status than Vuković, Hranić, and later Vukčić (all members of Kosača clan) wore the Duke of Hum title - such as Sankovićs, Nikolićs, Vlatkovićs, etc. - simply there was no such title as Grand Duke of Hum, there was only Grand Duke of Bosnia as a title. Of all Kosača members, only Stjepan Vukčić wore both titles, the Duke of Hum and Grand Duke of Bosnia, and also Knez of Drina and of Primorje, and he almost always used full title. There was also nobility from earlier periods, but as far as I know nobility in pre-Bosnian medieval state era mostly wore title of knez (knyaz/prince) and župan. In short, title Grand Duke of Hum never existed.
౪ Santa ౪
99°
00:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby Wii (tenative title)
- Kirby Wii (tenative title) → Kirby's Epic Yarn ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
"tenative" is not a word, and this isn't the only kirby game on the wii. it is the first one, though, so i'll give it that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom BugGhost 🪲👻 13:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby Wii
- Kirby Wii → Kirby's Return to Dream Land ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
not the only (or even first) kirby game on the wii, though it is known in japan as "星のカービィ wii", so my unspoken delete vote is slightly weaker than on kirby ds cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.— Alalch E. 14:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series) where the Kirby Wii games are discussed. The Wii section is primarily Kirby (series)#2011–2021: Evolution of 2.5D platforming although Kirby's Epic Yarn is (currently) in the previous section. -- Tavix ( talk) 14:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Byeol ui Kieby: Dauphin Ildang ui Seupgyeok
- Byeol ui Kieby: Dauphin Ildang ui Seupgyeok → Kirby: Squeak Squad ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
does wp:rlang apply? truth be told, i have no idea why the korean name is even mentioned in the article. is it disproportionately popular in south korea or something? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete arbitrary non-English redirect.— Alalch E. 14:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby DS
- Kirby DS → Kirby: Squeak Squad ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
there are 3 other kirby games on the ds, and squeak squad isn't even the first one cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.— Alalch E. 14:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series)#2005–2011: Touch-based gameplay where the Kirby DS games are discussed. -- Tavix ( talk) 14:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Amoogus
either a misspelling of "amogus", in which case fair enough, or of " amoonguss" (ironically usually based on amogus), in which case delete as dabifying between two misspellings used in shitposts would probably be a little unnecessary. this among us meme thing makes my brain go ouch cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. It's only one letter off from amogus, a well-known meme-spelling of Among Us; meanwhile, it's two letters off from Amoonguss, a mushroom Pokemon that predates Among Us, whose name is a simple reference to the phrase "a Fungus Among Us", and who quickly became associated with Among Us in meme circles just based off the name alone. One is less than two, which solves the WP:XY issue here IMO. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( talk) 20:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - per Lunamann above. Fieari ( talk) 23:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as it is a common mispelling of amongus. LegalSmeagolian ( talk) 01:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, overly vague. The search function exists for a reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ) 01:48, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)- Keep Per above. Amogus remains relevant forever. Even search results will redirect you to Among Us itself. Ahri Boy ( talk) 10:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Not similar enough to "amoonguss" to be vague. Just a misspelling of "amogus".— Alalch E. 14:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
CheckUser
- CheckUser → Wikipedia:CheckUser ( talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/ retarget/ delete ]
CNR. Should we retarget to Wiki#Security? Ahri Boy ( talk) 06:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Wiki#Security has no info on checkusers or equivalent functions. Checkusers are not something which beginner editors, who might not realize the existence of the Wikipedia namespace, would search up. Ca talk to me! 11:14, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I think the question should be whether this is a potential useful redirect and whether it's unambiguous. I think it is, on both accounts. It being a cross-namespace redirect does not mean it's not useful. Those types of redirects aren't covered under WP:CSD R2, meaning, in certain cases, they're allowed. Hey man im josh ( talk) 12:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- All Google results appear to be for Wikipedia and I'm not sure if there is much non Wikipedia usage. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note that there is also Checkuser which should also be deleted or retargeted if this is closed as delete or retarget. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)