This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 16, 2025.

• Wikipedia:CNN → Wikipedia:Consensus not numbers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Should point to the same target as WP:RSPCNN; essay itself not what people most look for. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 23:24, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#CNN per nom, similar to WP:FOX, WP:NYT, WP:SPLC, WP:VICE, etc. (note that WP:AP rightly points to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy [not to an essay] instead of Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Associated Press, which has no shortcut nor does it need one, since it is near the top of the list and already pretty reliable). WP:CONNN should be the new shortcut pointing to the current target, along the lines of WP:CON, which points to Wikipedia:Consensus. Pageviews for WP:RSPCNN and WP:CNN are similar, so that is not much of a factor here. Even so, I think this change will make things simpler for people to verify CNN's reliability. Havradim leaf a message 00:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#CNN per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:54, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Toy story tree → Toy Story 3  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Typo of "Toy Story three" RanDom 404 (talk) 22:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an implausible typo and potentially confusing to those who might be actually looking for a plant. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Paul_012. LarryL33k (Contribz) 23:47, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Paul. As implausible and superfluous as World war tree or Superman tree. Havradim leaf a message 00:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There's no relevant "tree" topic in the target subject or in any of the other Toy Story films. Steel1943 (talk) 15:59, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Paul_012 and Steel1943 Aprzn (talk) 04:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:18, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Miner's guild → Guild  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

No content specific to miners in target. Rusalkii (talk) 21:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia search shows that there are mentions of miner's guilds in our articles but no standalone section or article discussing this particular type of guild. --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• National Memorial Museum → National Memorial (Thailand)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This was left pointing to the wrong target (Bangkok National Museum) for 16+ years. I just fixed it to what is most likely the intended target, but I'm finding only a handful of sources that refer to the place it redundantly as "National Memorial Museum". Most search hits are instead partial matches for other places that include the phrase as part of their names, e.g. Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum, Katrina National Memorial Museum, and National Memorial Museum of Forced Mobilization under Japanese Occupation. There's also a National Memorial Museum in Karachi, but it doesn't appear to have a Wikipedia article. Maybe this should just be deleted. Paul_012 (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:VT → Wikipedia:WikiProject Vermont  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Obviously it's important to be very cautious when nominating project page shortcuts at RfD, but this one seems worthy of discussion. It's only been used 15 times, and of those instances, it seems that most did not intend to link to WikiProject Vermont. Its original destination in 2007 was Vandal target, and I see that it has also been mistaken as a shortcut for WP:Verifiability, not truth. Some of the intended targets cannot be readily determined, but they are clearly not the wikiproject. I think generally speaking, shortcuts to essays and guidelines are of more utility than wikiproject shortcuts. — Anonymous 15:35, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:CHEAP. Among the other U.S. states having no-to-low conflict WikiProject shortcuts which conform to their abbreviations, I found WP:AK, WP:AZ, WP:IL, WP:KY, WP:MI, WP:MO, WP:MS, WP:NJ, WP:NY, WP:OH, WP:TN, WP:WV and WP:WY. Why should this one be any different? The essay Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth already has an intuitive shortcut at WP:VNT. See a discussion about WP:NC at Wikipedia talk:Article titles/Archive 33 § Unusual "were you looking for?" entries such as "WikiProject North Carolina". Havradim leaf a message 01:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think that WP:CHEAP applies here, given that I'm not advocating for the deletion of this redirect. Your argument against retargeting seems to be a case of other stuff exists. I feel like I clearly explained why this one should be different in my nomination. — Anonymous 12:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandal target", and even "Vandal magnet" (my preferred term, though WP:VM is already taken, and WP:Vandal magnet goes somewhere else) do not appear using Control+F on the 'arguments to avoid' page, and WP:VNT exists already, so where else would you like to redirect WP:VT to? Havradim leaf a message 17:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment 2-letter redirects to state WPPs are usually bad, since they cause conflict with better targets for mostly moribund state projects to occupy instead. Also, all these state projects should just be prepended with WP or WPP, such as WP:WPPVT or WP:WPVT or WP:USAVT instead of VT, and so on for the other states. As WP:WPVT already exists as a shortcut, this one should be repurposed, made a disambiguation page, or deleted. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 01:44, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) for development → Free software  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Redirect is completely, 100% implausible for multiple reasons. You would have to 1) get the capitalization wrong (it isn't a proper noun), 2) not use the hyphen between 'Open' and 'Source', 3) have a parenthesized '(FOSS)' ???, and 4) tack on 'for development' for some godforsaken reason. This additionally redirects to 'Free software' instead of 'Free and open-source software', although that isn't nearly the main issue. Lastly, neither 'Free software' nor 'Free and open-source software' have any sort of section even remotely correlating to this redirect. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 14:22, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support removal of this redirect; it serves no purpose that I can see and seems to have been created (19 years ago) only as a means to replace a non-article instead of deleting it. --Qcomp (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd usually fully support deletion for all the excellent reasons the nom listed, but given that the redirect is two decades old, receives a small but steady trickle of traffic, and is fairly unambigious, I think I'm landing on a very weak keep. 21:29, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. This was not an intentional redirect, but a stub that (quoting in its entirety) described the topic as "An idea that Free Software and Open Source (also called Free/Libre and Open Source Software, or FLOSS) can be used for international development, or coping with issues of poverty and the ills that go along with it." None of that is mentioned at the target, so it's confusing/misleading on top of that and should just be deleted. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Paul & nom, plus "Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)" is of a form explicitly enumerated in WP:COSTLY Aprzn (talk) 16:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2025 United States constitutional crisis → Department of Government Efficiency  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

As well as DOGE's activities on federal agencies, the term 'constitutional crisis' has also been used around the same time to refer to threats to ignore court rulings as well. Xeroctic (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete popular discussion of a constitutional crisis is not limited solely to DOGE or to its actions.

This would have to be its own article, but the use of the term in a descriptive sense would have to become much more widespread in the RS than it currently is in order for it be considered a neutral point of view description. Mikewem (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the identification of this name with the target subject is not sufficiently established. Neither is expansion to an article appropriate to describe what is currently a matter of passing opinion (WP:RECENTISM). 2601:642:4F84:1590:DDA6:FEA5:D834:38CE (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Second_presidency_of_Donald_Trump#Federal_funding_freeze, the same as the 2024 United States Constitutional Crisis created earlier that I made in January 2025. Also I don't know why this specific redirect was created, as the capitalized one led to it, so delete one as you don't need two. The current usage of the term comes from the Government freeze of which (I can't believe I am saying this) DOGE is responsible for. Usage: 1. Des Vallee (talk) 21:59, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  different capitalizations are fine and dandy, so don't worry too much about that part (provided they're not implausible) consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• BEASTofBURDEN → Pack animal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Having apparently been created as a redirect to an article about a fashion label, now deleted, there's no reason this odd stylisation should redirect to the current target. If not deleted (my preference) a better target is disambiguation page Beast of Burden. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom; anyone searching with that specific irregular capitalization is clearly looking for the fashion label and will find no valuable information at any article or DAB page we currently have. — Anonymous 15:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless enough content exists on wikipedia to point a disambig link too, which it doesn't seem like it does. Rusalkii (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, and those above. BD2412 T 02:50, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:21, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Gaza massacre → List of massacres in the Palestinian territories  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Gaza Massacre → Gaza war  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

These are obviously not agreeing with each other, and I believe they are both in need of retargeting to Casualties of Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip. That is the most logical article for where all the killings over the long history of the Gaza conflict are encapsulated. List of massacres in the Palestinian territories is not specific to Gaza and Gaza war is just a holdout from when all of this referred only to Gaza War (2008–2009), which is obviously only one of the possible meanings. Having it pointing to the current war, while plausible, might be falling afoul of WP:RECENTISM. Havradim leaf a message 08:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Havradim leaf a message 09:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. Havradim leaf a message 09:45, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 14:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Support redirecting both to Casualties of Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 02:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Laa laa laa laa laaaaaaaaah... → The Blue Danube  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned in target, this is used twice on the internet and neither of them refer to this song, and no is going to search for this song like this. Rusalkii (talk) 06:56, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete – This is the just the conversation between Mr. Krabs and the DJ about the name of a song on the radio except not played as a joke. That someone thought this could help anyone is baffling. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 14:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, frivolous. 2601:642:4F84:1590:DDA6:FEA5:D834:38CE (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While maybe well intentioned, this would not be setting a good precedent for finding classical or instrumental music compositions. The Lala and La La La dabs exist for songs that actually contain these phrases in their titles, and this format should be kept for things like that only. Havradim leaf a message 23:15, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above, and as a very commonly misheard lyric in Hey Jude, possibly making this redirect ambiguous anyways. Steel1943 (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Friends lesbian kiss episode → Friends season 7#ep166  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Are descriptive episode names like this helpful? I'm genuinely asking. Also, it seems to have been wrongly tagged as being from a merge. — Anonymous 02:03, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I don't doubt someone would see smth like "my favourite episode of friends was the lesbian kiss episode" on socmed and look up something like "Friends lesbain kiss episode" User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:48, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, implausible search term, no evidence that this is a name. Let the search results do its thing imo. We don't redirect any "kiss episodes" of any television series, to the episode in question, on Wikipedia of all things, where every redirect requires perennial maintenance. Unhelpful redirect, let's not give the impression that these types of redirects are encouraged or acceptable. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@user:Yirba did you use this redirect in Wikidata? Because it might be deleted. Anthony2106 (talk) 05:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning keep. Accurate, harmless, I could see a reader looking up an episode centered on a moment iconic for the series in this way. BD2412 T 02:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Based on searches, this actually seems to be ambiguous with The One With the Lesbian Wedding. Since we can't be for sure which episode the reader is looking for, I think this redirect isn't useful. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Presidentman. LarryL33k (Contribz) 00:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete bordering on uninterpretability. The way this is structured does not imply that it is an episode of "Friends", rather, it is some episode of something where some friends have a lesbian kiss. Which I construe could be an episode of Roseanne, that the U.S. Congress launched congressional investigations about. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Seems like a plausible search term, and an episode like this airing in 2001 is noteworthy. Also as far as I can tell, "The One With the Lesbian Wedding" episode didn't actually show a kiss. Correct me if I'm wrong Presidentman. Anne drew · talk · contribs · 15:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• English WikipediA → English Wikipedia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

WP:UNNATURAL capitalisation; implausible redirect. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:58, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per {{R from camelcase}}. I am bad at usernames (talk) 03:13, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This isn't a plausible search term, and if it was the search results would help a user find the right page. {{R from camelcase}} is for legacy page names.

I note that the creator of this redirect also created Ddox as a redirect, suggesting a deficient understanding (at best) of the purpose of redirects. Oblivy (talk) 03:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oblivy, on that note, having looked through their contributions, I see that they have made many other confusing, often downright bizarre, redirects. Looking at Wikipedia:‑( makes me seriously question their level of competence. — Anonymous 03:39, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment camelcasE sayS nothinG abouT makinG thE lasT letteR captiaL, buT aS yoU caN seE thiS iS A verY normaL waY oF typinG sO thiS redirecT shoulD defientilY bE kepT^{[just kidding]} Anthony2106 (talk) 07:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

but someone should nominate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=WikipediA&oldid=208363752

Used on that uses page, they probably just copyed wikipediA Anthony2106 (talk) 08:08, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DeletE peR noM. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:8139:4F47:7D35:2A9F (talk) 13:41, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• weak keep, less per the nitty gritty of wp:camel, but per the styling of wikipedia's logo. then again, this redirect isn't exactly old, hence the vote being weak consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:45, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per consarn - wikipedia's logo has the last letter larger than the rest, it's not implausible. WikipediA exists as a {{R from stylization}}. BugGhost 🦗👻 09:48, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's logo may be stylised as "WikipediaA", but it is never stylised as "English WikipediA"... 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:CAMEL. Early in Wikipedia's history, two capital letters were required in every title, and while people were arbitrary as to where to put the capital letters for a while, it became a standard to do the first and last letter for some reason. Thankfully, this titling requirement was eventually lifted, but it's standard practice to keep all the old stupid CamelcasE links for historical reasons. Not to mention that, yes, the Wikipedia logo does have a larger "A" at the end, which could lead someone to plausibly type it even today. Fieari (talk) 23:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Edit: Sorry, I just assumed this was old because of the formatting. It is a new redirect, so my reasoning is only per the logo styling now. Fieari (talk) 23:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and add {{R from stylization}}. LarryL33k (Contribz) 00:37, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per BugGhost and LarryL33k. This stylisation business was once included in the lead paragraph, but was deemed to be not accurate due to all of the letters being in caps. However, to me this is still an indication that some people do perceive it this way. Havradim leaf a message 03:28, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dhruva Natchathiram → Dhruva  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Primary topic by far appears to be Dhruva Natchathiram (unreleased film). This alternative name isn't mentioned in the target. Sending this to RfD rather than redirecting myself to get further opinions, ideally from people who are familiar with Sanskrit and/or this subject area. Rusalkii (talk) 02:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was moved because "Dhruva Natchathiram" is another name for pole star. Bssasidhar, as the one who moved the article, you are requested to comment. Gotitbro, you are welcome as well. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:01, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The Killer is Calling → Lifetime (TV channel)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. It's a movie, not a TV show, so it can't go to List of programs broadcast by Lifetime, and the movies don't have a page. Rusalkii (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. target article contains no information on the subject. Pyxis Solitary (yak). Ol' homo. ⚢ 17:49, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this should be "Black Christmas" 1970s horror film, which originated the trope that the killer's call came from within the house -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Grieving process → Five stages of grief  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The five stages of grief aren't a widely accepted standard. I think retargeting to Grief is the better target. Interstellarity (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Grief – By redirecting to 'five stages of grief', we're not only putting our finger on the scale in favor of a specific model, but we're doing it for one which has zero foundation empirically or theoretically. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 14:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Grief per TheTechician27. LarryL33k (Contribz) 23:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Grief#Grieving process. Tule-hog (talk) 05:58, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Grief per nom. Most readers will see the first paragraph "Grieving process" immediately. Havradim leaf a message 17:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  ..."Paragraph"? Do you mean "section"? Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, of course (been too tired lately). I think a person would benefit from reading the overview first, with the first section right at hand anyway. I would think differently if the eponymous section was buried somewhere in the article. Havradim leaf a message 18:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  For what it's worth, the Grief#Grieving process header doesn't immediately on certain devices, such as monitors with a very small resolution and/or high zoom, or mobile view. At least with the section redirect, readers go where they want to go immediately, especially helpful if the user is not very savvy with technology. Steel1943 (talk) 19:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Grief#Grieving process which can be seen as a more precise target to match the redirect than going to the base article name Grief since both the redirect matches the section name and the section describes the subject of the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Maybe consider retargeting any of these redirects [1] like Grief process. Interstellarity (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Grief#Grieving process per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:28, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]