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 moot. An article has been created at the title. (non-admin closure) — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• KWDR (FM)KWDR (FM) → 93.5 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Linking to one of the radio stations by frequency lists, where this station is listed, creates a circular link. It also obscures a valid redlink, which could be turned into a stand-alone article. Mlaffs (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Replace redirect with new article that has since been created.--Tdl1060 (talk) 21:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Replace redirect with new article now at that title MB 22:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Replace as nom. Mlaffs (talk) 01:37, 15 May 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 KWDR (FM). ✗plicit 03:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• K272EDK272ED → 93.5 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Translator broadcasts at 102.3 FM, so a redirect to 93.5 FM makes no sense. Translators are not listed in radio station lists by frequency, and no article exists for the parent station, so no suitable target exists. Therefore this redirect should be deleted. Tdl1060 (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to article KWDR (FM), which just appeared. Delete. I tried to find a valid target at WT:WikiProject Radio Stations#K272ED but I don't think there is one. Certes (talk) 22:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The previous redlink to the parent station, KWDR (FM), has also been redirected to 93.5 FM. I hope that this is an isolated one-off thing, rather than a concerted effort to eliminate redlinks in this manner. Mlaffs (talk) 21:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, I'll go for retarget now too. Mlaffs (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to KWDR (FM), a new article where this is mentioned. MB 22:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to KWDR (FM), as this article has been created. --DrChuck68 (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to KWDR (FM) as nom.--Tdl1060 (talk) 18:51, 16 May 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:59, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Ferencvárosi TC (women)Ferencvárosi TC (women) → Ferencvárosi TC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Per WP:RED, delete redirect to encourage article creation Seany91 (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it would be better to start a stub article at that title and then link it to the parent article, rather than leaving a red link. (And if you do choose to start an article, then further action is not needed at RfD.) The owner of all ✌️ 21:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article currently also mentions women's teams. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 15:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, to encourage creation of a standalone article. GiantSnowman 15:36, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete in favour of valid red link per WP:REDYES. Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 22:46, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: as per WP:REDYES. Also, the women's football team is not mentioned at target article Joseph2302 (talk) 11:22, 18 May 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 keep. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Bucharest summitBucharest summit → 2008 Bucharest summit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Many summits of many different organizations have occured in Bucharest. There's no reason to redirect this page to this article and there's not really any better option for a target article. I think this redirect should be deleted. Super Ψ Dro 20:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. All mentions of Bucharest summit (even without mentioning the year) in Wikipedia refer to the 2008 summit. Jay (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The 2008 summit is the clear primary topic on Google. Thryduulf (talk) 11:24, 14 May 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. There is a general consensus that misspelling redirects in the template namespace need to meet a higher bar than those in the article namespace, but few of the keep comments attempted to address this. It was suggested that a bot fixing template mispellings would benefit from the existence of this redirect but that was countered by others noting that the presence of a redirect would either not be required or would require the creation of a great many similar redirects. Any such redirects would need to be discussed as a class in the context of a specific bot, which is hypothetical at this point and, based on this discussion, consensus for its existence cannot be guaranteed. Taken all together I find that the arguments for deletion are stronger. Thryduulf (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Cute news → Template:Cite news  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Wikipedia talk:Redirect#What should the guidance be on redirects from misspellings in template space?

This was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 21#Template:Cute news. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 May 4 arrived at a consensus to relist the RfD because most participants in the previous discussion apparently didn't recognize that this is a redirect from a misspelling, not a joke. What should be examined here is whether such a redirect is useful. This is a procedural nomination, I am neutral. Sandstein 19:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete again. Typo template redirects should not exist. We don't want Wikitext filled with typos. Typo redirects are for the purpose of navigation by readers, not for use by experienced editors. Editors should preview to make sure they haven't made any typos - if they don't, then that's their issue, redirects to clean up the one-in-a-million typo are completely unnecessary when it will be corrected by the next person who views the page. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:48, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Implausible, unused and pointless per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 10#Template:Ctie book, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Template:Cite jorunal and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Template:Cute book. Such misspellings should be corrected at source not via redirect to prevent confusion (reason for deletion #2) and avoid the risk of making it unreasonably difficult (reason for deletion #1) for bots, automated systems and searches to deal effectively with templated citations. DrKay (talk) 20:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I have explained at multiple forums how this template is useful for readers (it displays a rendered citation instead of an ugly red link), which satisfies guideline #5 at WP:R#KEEP. The plausibility of this typo is easily demonstrated by its appearance in this report of redlinked templates. Template redirects from typos are easily and regularly fixed by bots and gnomes, which is why there are often zero transclusions.
  The guiding principles of RFD say Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept. I have demonstrated that this template redirect meets the guidelines listed there (namely, it is a likely misspelling, and it is useful), so either the people arguing for "Delete" without citing equally valid consensus guideline text should have a very high bar to get over, or the guiding principles or guidelines need to be changed.
  If this template is to be deleted, that means that the guideline text at WP:R#DELETE, and WP:R#KEEP, as well as the documentation of {{R from misspelling}}, is invalid with respect to template space. I propose postponing a decision on this RFD until a well advertised discussion is held about changing those guidelines. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC) (expanded 03:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC))[reply]
  • Template:Cite Sons, Template:Cote web and Template:Cite mixmijsd cijfdmcijrfmcijfrmcijfrnfijrfnifjfrmjfifweb also appear in that list of redlinked templates. Such templates appear in the list regularly: cite jweb, Template:Cite The best Dallas rapper! tweet, cite wev, and that's just the last 48 hours. It is absurd to create redirects for every instance of mistyping. Just correct the typo or undo the vandalism. DrKay (talk) 21:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is a straw man. I am not advocating the creation of redirects that are clearly related to vandalism or incompetence. This discussion is about likely typos made by otherwise competent editors, for which more than 100 redirects already exist in template space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Jonesey95: indeed, {{R from misspelling}} should not apply to non-substituted templates in template-space. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • This would represent a change to the current guideline; I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Redirect. All are welcome there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• One way I think redirects like this one could be useful is that if it is transcluded, a (new) bot detects the template name misspelling and replaces it with the target template. If this redirect is deleted, a redlink can often remain unnoticed for months or even years, so I view this as the best solution. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 02:02, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• @J947: We already have all the bots and behind the scenes machinery to implement something like this - it should be fairly simple to do and shouldn't require any real work. The easiest way of doing this would be to create Template:Cite web/typo as a wrapper that just passes any parameters given to it to a cite web template, set it to be automatically substituted only using {{Always substitute}}, then redirect any plausible typos for cite web to it. This is how we deal with other common template conversions, e.g. {{Internetquelle}} redirects to {{Cite web/German}} which converts the parameters and template name to English and is automatically substituted by a bot. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm pretty sure it's easier than that. A bot can look for any instances of template redirects that are tagged with {{R from misspelling}} and replace the typo with the correct redirect target. For example, if {{cute news}} is transcluded in an article (and rendering as a valid citation, to the benefit of readers and editors alike), the bot would simply change the "u" to an "i", resulting {{cite news}}, and would not touch the template's parameters. No fancy substing needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not only not a likely typo, but barely even a plausible one - if your fingers are in the wrong place so as to type u instead of i, you're also going to type b instead of n. WP:R already forbids this redirect; we don't need to change it to make it even more explicit. There are exactly zero similar redirects in tthe template namespace except ones created by this editor, and already on RFD, and already headed toward strong delete consensuses. —Cryptic 04:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a few thoughts here: I think that it's more likely for the finger to slide than for the hands to move position considering the standard indentations on f and j on the keyboard. Also considering that not all people touch type and the fairly sizeable amount of usage that one-place typo redirects receive normally, I think that your premise is interesting but flawed. Also, I'm not sure how WP:R forbids this redirect: some part of the page may discourage its creation, but that's not the same as encouraging its deletion or forbidding it. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 06:07, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. {{R from misspelling}} redirects are for the benefit of uncertain readers, not of editors who mistype. Redlinked template names or fields are a non-problem, they jump out at you on previewing, and any few that slip through get corrected by anyone interested enough to look at the citation (or even a passing gnome who notices the error message). What next? {{bite cook}}? Narky Blert (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for the same reasons as Wikipedia:Redirects for_discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Template:Cute book. If a new bot task is adopted for fixing typos in template evocations that would require the existence of this redirect, then for the task to be useful there would also be the need for the creation of redirects for all typos that are at least as plausible as this one, and there are thousands of them. I don't think this is going to be practical. – Uanfala (talk) 14:46, 26 May 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 procedural close. Discussion continued at Talk:Saugus (disambiguation)#Requested move 13 May 2021 - Eureka Lott 20:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Saugus → Saugus, Massachusetts  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Saugus can also refer to Saugus, Santa Clarita, California. According to the American Community Survey's 2019 population estimates, Saugus, MA had a population of 28,215. The zip code 91350, which encompasses most of Saugus, CA, had a population of 36,173 - and this does not include the portions of Saugus which lie in 91354 and 91390. (Full disclosure - I live in Saugus, CA.) Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 18:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• What are you proposing? Do you want to retarget the base title to Saugus, California or move Saugus (disambiguation) to the base title? If you're proposing the latter, you should open a WP:RM discussion instead of bringing it here. - Eureka Lott 19:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Saugus (disambiguation) to the base title. I'm opening an RM right now. Reply to the discussion here. Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 20:24, 13 May 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 23:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• NATMOS → Everywhere at the End of Time  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, no relevant search results on the internet as far as I can tell. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: NATMOS is a shortening of the album title Nowhere at the Millennium of Space, which itself was inspired by Everywhere at the End of Time. There was info about it that was removed later, since it was too trivial to be included and was only sourced by WP:USERG. Delete per nom. WTR (hello) 22:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Enwiki has no mention of this term. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: per nom. DMT biscuit (talk) 20:42, 14 May 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 Professional sports. ✗plicit 03:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Pro ballPro ball → Professional gridiron football  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

"Pro ball" can refer to any ball sport played at the professional level - not to gridiron football in particular. Searching "pro ball" on Google yields results related to many different sports. Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 16:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Professional sports. --JBL (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Professional sports per JBL; this seem to be the most logical thing to do. Hog Farm _Talk 04:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per JBL and Hog Farm. Vaticidalprophet 06:29, 15 May 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 keep. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 16:21, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• John W. RiggsJohn W. Riggs → John Mankey Riggs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

JWR and JMR are totally different initials. I was looking for a John W. Riggs who was a professor/theologian and is still alive not a dead dentist with different initials. TipsyElephant (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm very confused here. The article was originally created at this title by DRosenbach who moved it to the present title 2 days later. Google searches provide results that are clearly about the same person under both names but I've not found anything that clearly links the two. The article is mainly based on off-line sources I don't have access to so I can't check them. In addition there is an American professor of Obstetrics & Gynecology with the name "John W. Riggs". Thryduulf (talk) 16:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• If online searching provides the same information for both sets of initials, how is it constructive to delete the redirect? That's where my confusion lies. This was a long time ago and we don't know why JMW is sometimes referred to as JMR, but let's maintain the redirect. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 04:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Thryduulf, can you give some examples of the overlap in Google results? I found the Wikipedia article and associated image under John W. Riggs, but that is probably due to the redirect. DRosenbach have you looked at the article history and done an internet search? This looks to me like you created an article at the wrong title as a stub and then moved it. TSventon (talk) 11:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  A google search for "John W. Riggs" dentist -Wikipedia includes a significant number of results which strongly indicate that there was a periodontist known by this name, including [1][2][3][4]. Repeating the search but using "John Mankey Riggs" dentist -Wikipedia gives results about the same person, including [5][6][7][8][9][10]. As you might expect there are also references to him as "John Riggs" and "John M. Riggs" (in all cases search for "Riggs" in the text if it isn't obvious). Thryduulf (talk) 11:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Thryduulf, thanks, I didn't look too hard as you had done the work already. The discrepancy is explained in note 1 of the article (I corrected the initial in Carranza's from M to W). There is an edition of Carranza's at https://www.academia.edu/42741551/Clinical_PERIODONTOLOGY. I suggest that the lead should say "also referred to as John W. Riggs" to highlight the discrepancy. TSventon (talk) 12:30, 16 May 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 keep. This is the primary target, disambiguation can be effectively handled with hatnotes. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Life After LoveLife After Love → Believe (Cher song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The phrase is only mentioned at target in quotes from lyrics of the song. In my opinion, it would be more fitting to redirect this to Victoria Monét, who has albums called "Life After Love" (which is where I was originally navigating to, before being redirected here). -- dylx 14:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but add hatnotes. The Cher song is overwhelmingly the primary topic on google searches for the phrase, being the most prominent lyric in the song that isn't surprising, but wherever this points the current target, Victoria Monét and Life After Love (film) should all be linked by hatnotes. Thryduulf (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate but as Thryduulf says this could be done with a hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:34, 14 May 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 08:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Lethal Lava Land → Super Mario 64  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

An individual level in the game that is not mentioned in the target article. WP:GAMECRUFT. – numbermaniac 08:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The level itself isn't notable. The redirect title does share a name with a trope on TV Tropes; I would say that most people who find this redirect are looking on the wrong wiki instead of looking for a specific level in a game. HotdogPi 17:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete we don’t need to list every single level.--65.92.163.98 (talk) 02:42, 14 May 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 Balinese cuisine. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 16:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Be urutanBe urutan → Saucisson  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This appears to be the name of a similar sausage in Malay cuisine, but the target only discusses French cuisine. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Balinese cuisine. Urutan is a type of Balinese sausage. The "Be" part translates to meat. Just because it resembles Saucisson doesn't mean it is the exact same. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:23, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The retarget proposal sounds good to me. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:26, 13 May 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 03:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 2017 Route 91 Harvest Festival shooting, Las Vegas → 2017 Las Vegas shooting  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Implausible redirect, only existed for ~20 minutes as an undiscussed move, so unlikely to have any incoming external links. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as correct and harmless. No benefit to deletion, but keeping it might help someone find what they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 11:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Unlike the other such redirect, this one isn't really correct for the reasons discussed at the ANI -- this location isn't the one most associated with the shooting. Considering that, it's not particularly useful. Vaticidalprophet 04:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I find it unlikely that anyone would search for this particular name. It's most well known as "the Las Vegas shooting"; even if people know of the Harvest Festival, specifically naming a route number for this is a very unlikely search query. Also agreed with Vaticidalprophet's points. – numbermaniac 09:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as accidental name per nom, and with non-relevant words per numbermaniac. Jay (talk) 08:31, 14 May 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 New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. ✗plicit 03:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• NYC HealthNYC Health → NYC Health + Hospitals  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

"NYC Health" is ambiguous and could just as easily refer to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, whose logo reads "NYC Health." However, it actually redirects to NYC Health + Hospitals. In the alternative, I suppose it could be turned into a disambiguation page, though I'm admittedly not entirely sure how to do that. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene which is referred to simply as NYC Health, including in its own website and publications. The existing redirect target appears to studiously avoid calling itself simply NYC Health and it does not appear to be a common usage elsewhere. I can see there might be confusion, but nothing that a hatnote wouldn't fix. The only mainspace wikilink to this redirect in en.wikipedia.org is actually trying to link the city department and not the hospital provider. Lithopsian (talk) 14:13, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene per nom and Lithopsian. -- dylx 15:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. I concur. --Bsherr (talk) 22:43, 14 May 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.