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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Syrian Orthodox ChurchSyrian Orthodox Church → Syriac Orthodox Church  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Orthodox Syrian ChurchOrthodox Syrian Church → Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Jstalins originally pointed Orthodox Syrian ChurchOrthodox Syrian Church to Malankara Church in 2018. Today, Br Ibrahim john retargeted it to Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. Meanwhile, in February Srnec moved the DAB formerly at Syrian Orthodox ChurchSyrian Orthodox Church to Syrian Orthodox (disambiguation) and then retargeted the redirect to Syriac Orthodox Church.

In my opinion, these should point to the same place, rather than having target determined by the arbitrary ordering of two adjectives. Both the Malankara and Syriac churches can be accurately described as both Orthodox and Syrian (just in different senses of the word "Syrian"). As neither article is titled "Orthodox Syrian" / "Syrian Orthodox", this doesn't seem like a case of WP:SMALLDETAILS. Given that the DAB page disambiguates among four churches and a denomination comprising several churches, I suggest that we move the DAB page back to Syrian Orthodox ChurchSyrian Orthodox Church and retarget Orthodox Syrian ChurchOrthodox Syrian Church to the DAB. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Orthodox Syrian Church is a non-existent entity. If it should be redirected to a page, it should be Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church only. It is because it is a cooked up story from this denomination.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @Br Ibrahim john: Could you elaborate on cooked up story? -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:38, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, certainly. Following the establishment of a self-governing entity in the Malankara Church of India in 1912, two separate denominations arose. One (Malankara Syriac Orthodox Church) remained as an integral part of the Syriac Orthodox Church. The other (Malankara Syriac Orthodox Church) started claiming autocephaly (self government). This lead to a series of court cases that lasted for more than a century. During this time, the latter enacted its own constitution, in which it is mentioned that they belong to an entity called the Orthodox Syrian Church. On the other hand the former referred to themselves as a part of the Syrian (Syriac) Orthodox Church. This change was due to the court case. In reality, the Syriac Orthodox Church has never been reffered to as Orthodox Syrian Church ever before or after. In short, the Orthodox Syrian Church is a non-existent entity which has been created for legal reasons only by the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church.Br Ibrahim john (talk) 03:46, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  The only correct target for these redirects should be the Syriac Orthodox Church which is a very real and current entity. The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church and others are distinct from the Syriac Orthodox Church by nature of the moniker "Malankara", which clearly distinguishes them here on Wikipedia. Elizium23 (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget Agree with Tamzin and Elizium23.
  move the DAB page back to Syrian Orthodox ChurchSyrian Orthodox Church and retarget Orthodox Syrian ChurchOrthodox Syrian Church to the DAB. J.Stalin S ^Talk 08:05, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• No change. In no case should "Syrian Orthodox" and "Syriac Orthodox" be treated differently. Srnec (talk) 00:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the first, retarget the second to Syrian Orthodox (disambiguation). The terms are ambiguous and the dab page is useful for that, but Syriac Orthodox Church is clearly the primary topic and should be found when a user types Syrian instead of Syriac. Place Clichy (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Syrian Orthodox Church: There is no mention of this term at the target. The talk page says "The Syrian Orthodox Church has renamed itself the Syriac Orthodox Church.", but given the lack of references in the page, the DAB swap made by Srnec should be contested. Until then I have No opinion on a vote for this.

Orthodox Syrian Church: There is no mention of this term either at the previous target Malankara Church, or the current one Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church. Archive 1 of the latter's talk page has lot of discussion around the term, where one assertion is that Orthodox Syrian Church is the same as Syrian Orthodox Church. But it also has the Supreme Court of India judgment that says ".. the Malankara Church .. is a part or division of the world Orthodox Syrian Church ...". Assuming that the court meant Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church here, I'll support the change made by Br Ibrahim john and vote to Keep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay (talk • contribs) 06:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Orthodox Church: Syriac Christianity#Name says: ... the term "Syriac Christianity" is preferred over the alternative form "Syrian Christianity". .. That distinction is not yet universally accepted, even among scholars.. Churches of Syriac tradition in India still self-identify, in Indian English, as "Syrian" Churches, both for sociolinguistic and legal reasons.

If and when Syrian Orthodox Church is a standalone article, it should be about the name shift from Syrian to Syriac, how some American immigrant Christians had to wrangle with the term, why "Syrian Orthodox Church" may be a misnomer, and why some churches still use Syrian. In that sense, converting the DAB, to a redirect to the DAB was an improvement, and I would say Keep. - Jay ^Talk 04:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Coment. Some other redirects that may need a relook. Syrian OrthodoxSyrian Orthodox redirects to Syriac Orthodox Church (and not to Syrian Orthodox (disambiguation)). Both Syrian OrthodoxSyrian Orthodox and Orthodox SyrianOrthodox Syrian redirect to Syriac Orthodox Church. (This is in lines of the current Rfd's nomination). - Jay ^Talk 04:48, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep I understand the desire to get these in sync, but if I understand the situation correctly, they're both misnomers, and not necessarily for the same thing. This is one of those situations where as long as we have the right navigational aids in place (hatnotes, disambiguation pages, etc.), I'm not too worried about where these titles point. Alternatively, the idea of a WP:CONCEPTDAB at Syrian Orthodox Church could be helpful, if we don't have to resort too heavily to WP:OR or WP:SYN. --BDD (talk) 15:52, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "Syrian Orthodox" is not a misnomer. It is identical in meaning to Syriac Orthodox. Srnec (talk) 01:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  You have referred to the terms Syrian OrthodoxSyrian Orthodox and Syriac OrthodoxSyriac Orthodox (which are redirects too). The current Rfd is for the churches. I did not say "Syrian Orthodox" is a misnomer, I said "Syrian Orthodox Church" may be a misnomer. I could be wrong from my limited reading of Wikipedia articles for purposes of this Rfd. - Jay ^(Talk) 22:35, 15 June 2021 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Maryland Department of Housing and Community DevelopmentMaryland Department of Housing and Community Development → Government of Maryland  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Only mention at target page is The Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) oversees housing policy. There's almost certainly an article that could be written here, so we should delete per WP:REDLINK to encourage creation. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 02:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Tag {{R with possibilities}}, refine to Government of Maryland#Other, but otherwise keep it as it is. First priority is to help the readers, second priority to help the editors. This redirect fulfills its purpose to help readers, other considerations are less important. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 03:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  How does it help readers? -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  It shows them the extent of the relevant information on the site rather than making them wade through this steaming pile of unhelpful search results. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 03:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  The extent of the relevant information rounds down to zero. All that the article says is that the Housing Department oversees housing. I suppose it's helpful if you didn't expect "Maryland Department of..." to refer to a government entity in Maryland, but I'm not sure who'd be searching this term without knowing that. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 04:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Indeed. We can easily show the reader the exact extent of the relevant information. That is the function of this redirect. Besides, the reader may not know that the department oversees housing policy. It is likely that they infer it oversees housing construction solely. Nevertheless, it is better to show the reader the extent of information rather than deal with unhelpful search results. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm also not convinced that there's an article here, as much as it would make sense. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Mentioned in the article, and a suitable target. The redirect can be converted into an article if required. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This was a redlink from 2014 until NYC Guru made it a self-redirect a month back. The suggested target Government of Maryland#Other will still be a self-redirect. Other redlinks added at the time have got their own articles now: Health (2016) and Environment (2020). Correct the mistake made by the user, and get back to redlink. - Jay ^(Talk) 17:26, 14 June 2021 (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 Hindutva. Deryck C. 11:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Fascism in IndiaFascism in India → Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sangh#Accusations_of_Fascism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

should be deleted. The jump from "Accusations of Fascism" to a claim of outright Fascism has serious POV issues and creates issues with failure to cover any other potential forms of Fascism in India. ©Geni (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I think Geni has forgotten a rationale here. (Rationale now added — Bilorv (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)) The page has a non-trivial history and I'm not sure if any of it is needed for attribution of content now found at the target article. — Bilorv (talk) 17:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bilorv, looking at the pages if there was ever a need for attribution, it doesn't exist anymore. The page has been a redirect since 2008 and the target is a high traffic page which has undergone a lot of changes since then. I would suggest a retarget to Hindutva though, RSS is one of a number of organisations which have faced accusations of being fascist in an ideological sense of the word, all due to their adherence of Hindutva. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 04:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: the topic is significantly broader than the current target, which is at best some experts thinking the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh are informed by fascism. Hindutva#Fascist and Nazi undertones is better (retarget as second choice) but it's still a misleading and POV target. The topic "Fascism in India" connotes something broader but there is no appropriate article or section that discusses this topic as a whole (that I can see). — Bilorv (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Hindutva per below. — Bilorv (talk) 23:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as ambiguous and likely to lead to confusion. There's nothing at Politics of India. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, with respect to the rationale provided I would recommend against deletion, non-neutral names for redirects are allowed per WP:RNEUTRAL. Identification of fascism in India is exclusive to Hindutva at present, and has become increasingly mainstream among its detractors which makes this an useful redirect. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 08:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's more than non-neutral, but non-neutral in a misleading way. Like if I redirected Ethical editing practices on Wikipedia to User:Bilorv. It has an air of objectivity but it's not what you'd expect and very much a contentious label. I'd need to see some sources that say that almost all accusations of (modern) fascism in India refer to Hindutva. — Bilorv (talk) 21:02, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bilorv, I don't think it's misleading. I don't know what else one could be referring to with this term. I understand that the term "fascist" or "fascism" might seem incendiary to the unacquainted but it is what one is likely to expect in this case and it is contentious by its very nature in that it uses these terms. I'm saying this because it does not just have an air of objectivity, instead is a majority view among scholars to the point that it is close to an academic consensus.

Regarding sources, meta-commentary which directly states something along the lines of "accusations of fascism in India is exclusive to Hindutva" is going to quite difficult to find due to the reason that it's a lot more harder to find sources on negative facts. But if one wants to know the degree to which this identification is made, there is a wide array of high quality scholarly sources which directly identify fascism with Hindutva and discusses it in detail.^[16]

I've cited some, the sources provided are only a small subset of the academic sources available, this is without mentioning news media. One thing to be noted in the list is that some of them tend to use terms such as "Indian fascism" or "fascism in India" which is the closest reference to what you are requesting. I don't think you can find any academic source whatsoever which refers to a different ideological strain in contemporary India as fascist. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 22:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see. Thanks for putting the effort in. I'm convinced enough by this that the target is unambiguous to change my opinion, deferring to your much greater knowledge of Indian politics. My prior familiarity was limited to socialist criticisms that some of Modi's actions and beliefs resemble some forms of fascism, but looking at it more closely, Hindutva is precisely those parts of Modi's ideology. — Bilorv (talk) 23:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Hindutva per Tayi Arajakate. I don't like the implication that Hindutva constitutes the entirety of fascism in India, and ideally, this will one day be a stand-alone article. But for now, I think this is a tolerable substitute. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 16:59, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Most "Fascism in" redirects point either to a dedicated article about fascism in that country (like History of far-right movements in France) or to a section at the relevant Fascism in <continent> article. There is no mention of India at Fascism in Asia, and Hindutva is an incomplete discussion of the topic, making no mention of, for instance, the Indian Legion. Delete for now, with no prejudice against recreation to point toward an India section at Fascism in Asia, or some article discussing the topic with suitable breadth. I'll note the existence of Fascism in SpainFascism in Spain → Falangism, which superficially at least seems similar to the idea of redirecting this to Hindutva, and perhaps should be reviewed depending on the outcome of this RfD. (Also, there's no Fascism in Germany page, apparently. Not sure what to do about that.) -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 02:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Hindutva acc. to Tayi Arjakate's arguments. TrangaBellam (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Just a comment but there is no "Accusations of Fascism" section of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh any longer so the redirect will have to either be deleted or retargeted to another page or another section of this article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 4 July 2021 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:NRWikipedia:NR → Wikipedia:Notability (royalty)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Retarget to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#National Review as a more useful shortcut. Existing target is a defunct proposal with no edits in over 9 years. Few incoming links; only 2 are from active talk pages, and both appear to be typos where the user meant to write WP:NOR: [1][2] Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree that the current target isn't worth keeping. As an abbreviation in general, NR has a number of meanings. (National Review happens to be listed first at the DAB page, but only for alphabetical reasons.) While National Review may be the only one of those topics discussed in projectspace, I don't think that "NR = National Review" is a common enough association in people's minds to justify this shortcut. There are only 676 two-letter shortcuts, making this a case where a redirect is not in fact cheap. WP:NATIONALREVIEW can easily be created to serve this purpose without room for confusion. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 02:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom if there are no better claimants. National Review certainly is known as NR or N.R. (in the Wikipedia page too). And we have WP:BI leading to Business Insider in the same target page. - Jay ^Talk 18:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate: Neither the current nor proposed targets are convincing lone uses, and the current uses are apparently typos for a third. By extension, disambiguation seems the smoothest solution. Vaticidalprophet 04:33, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Won't shortcuts lose its purpose then? Do we have any other disambiguated shortcuts? - Jay ^(Talk) 06:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  There are tons of disambiguated shortcuts -- a whole category for projectspace disambigs, many shortcuts. Vaticidalprophet 09:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete fails basic WP:GNG. Coltsfan (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  The notability guideline is for mainspace articles though, not project space redirects. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  My point is that the term itself doesn't have the enough backing on sources or traffic on the internet to justify a redirect. Coltsfan (talk) 00:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  This is a projectspace redirect. Backing in sources doesn't really come into play. You won't find a lot of sources saying that "N" should stand for notability either, nor that "RfD" should stand for "Redirects for discussion". -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 00:53, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Again, missing the point. If you want to redirect a term or name to a article, it must have some traction. It must be a name in use, a nickname, something like that. If not, i can make something up and just redirect. And that is not how it works. I don't think this is hard to understand. Coltsfan (talk) 11:22, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Please propose that at WP:SHORTCUT. It currently says: "It is possible to create a shortcut for any page at all." - Jay ^(Talk) 14:56, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Ah i didn't even noticed that i got the WP wrong. lol But still, the main argument sticks, but not the link. Sorry. Coltsfan (talk) 15:02, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate per Vaticidalprophet. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 15:45, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Disambiguate. Are there that many users disputing the use of National Review as a source? Wouldn't something like WP:RSPNR be convenient enough? feminist (+) 06:05, 5 July 2021 (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 23:52, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hei no Saemon → Lee Kuan Yew  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I have absolutely no idea how this redirect is related to LKY. A quick Google with "Lee Kuan Yew" and "Hei no Saemon" shows nothing. Seloloving (talk) 12:52, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Write the article or delete or redirect to Nichiren (currently not the best choice). The current target is inexplicable to me, but there was a historical person named Hei no Saemon (also called Taira no Yoritsuna) who lived during Japan's Kamakura period. This person is currently mentioned only at Nichiren, which doesn't really make for a good target because it's not about Saemon. The best approach would be to write an article about the subject, the second best would be to at least delete the false connection to Lee Kuan Yew. 50.248.234.77 (talk) 22:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete to encourage article creation. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:11, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Sorry, I forgotten why I has created this sort of redirection. I may have did an big mistake in 4 years ago due to have certain disputes with other editors that's relevant to Nichiren topics and has created this sort of redirection in accidentally. There is no WP:INDY for me to write about Hei no Saemon topic and link it to Nichiren's article , so delete it. I make an apology for create this redirected accidentally in 4 years ago. SA 13 Bro (talk) 09:40, 29 June 2021 (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.