March 26

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 26, 2025.

Davontae

There are multiple articles about people with the name Davontae and there is no name article about the name Davontae, so it doesn't make sense that Davontae redirects to this article. ProtobowlAddict uwu! (talk | contributions) 22:37, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve proposed a merge of all 4 names on the Devonte talk page. ProtobowlAddict talk! 22:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffree Star tour redirects

Various redirects that seem to reference tours made by the target article's subject ... which were all formerly redirects towards the since-redirected List of Jeffree Star concert tours and are all not mentioned in the target article. (Note: I'm Pregnant, Let's Party! and Jeffree Star Will Steal Your Man are both {{R with history}}s with the former being an article for about 11 years and the latter being an article for about half a year.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Graham

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 23:33, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from a person's name to a video game, for a person not named in that video game's article to provide any context for why he redirects there. Obviously this may be a fairly common name, but the person of this name that I'm aware of does happen to be a voice actor -- so he may possibly have voiced a character in the game, but his IMDb profile doesn't credit him with that to be sure, and the lack of mention in the article means I can't verify that it was intended to represent a different person either. And the inbound links to this title are all expecting the voice actor anyway, meaning that even if this was intended to represent somebody different he'd still be less notable than the voice actor.
And for added bonus, Joshua Graham (whether the voice actor or another person) wasn't even mentioned in the video game article at the time this redirect was created, so there was never any context present for it. Bearcat (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Fandom states [Josh Graham] appears as the central character in the Fallout: New Vegas add-on Honest Hearts and is mentioned in Fallout: New Vegas and its add-on Lonesome Road.[1], but that's not a reliable source and doesn't help with the lack of mention in the article here. The same wiki says that the character was voiced by Keith Szarabajka, his article does mention in the lead that he portrayed Joshua Graham among other roles (for some reason the internal search engine didn't include this result) but I don't think a redirect there will help anyone looking for information about the character and it would definitely be confusing for someone looking for information about a different actor. Thryduulf (talk) 18:06, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Michael Jordans

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 23:34, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely no indication at the target (or anywhere that I could find) that the shoes are referred to this way. This is otherwise vague/misleading/ambiguous/etc. The only actual usage of this I could find was either people not knowing how an apostrophe works, or "The Michael Jordans of ..." in reference to the elite people at some activity. Suggest deleting. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:21, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While it did seem plausible to me that "Air Jordans" might be referred to as "Michael Jordans" since Michael is after all associated with the brand, I could find nothing of the sort when I searched online. Therefore making it a misleading redirect. The redirect got 8 pageviews on its creation day (maybe from the creator and NPP) and one after that, but nothing else. Plant🌱man (talk) 21:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The entire page could be referred to a Michael Jordans -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:10, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:10, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Donald Trumps

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 23:34, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's only one Donald Trump (notable, anyway). It's not like there are multiple "Donald Trumps". I've also never heard or read this in my life, except maybe as a misspelling of "Donald Trump's" Plant🌱man (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was just thinking about yhis redirect and I want it deleted. My thought was the misspelling of Donald Trump's, but nah. CheeseyHead (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll tag with {{db-g7}} Plant🌱man (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Cascade Green

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 14:18, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly implausible redirect. It is a name of a shade of green, and the only mention of "Cascade Green" I can find online associated with the train line is on Metra's about page with a brief mention of it being the official color used on timetables. TruenoCity (talk) 04:54, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: For what it's worth, this redirect is not mentioned at Shades of green. Steel1943 (talk) 07:50, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I've found literally hundreds of sources stating that the BNSF used a cascade green livery, including in books and magazines that appear reliable, but while this is mentioned in an image caption at BNSF Railway#Paint schemes which is not a useful target for someone using this search term and the other place it is mentioned are even less suitable (e.g. individual locomotives). The colour was also used on the 1960 Chevrolet Corvette, but that's not a useful target either. Capitalised, Cascade Green is a neighbourhood in Atlanta about which we have no more information than the name, and the former name of a beer (Cascade Brewery#Premium range). They might make suitable dab page entries but in the absence of any information on the primary topic (the colour) I think search results are preferable. Thryduulf (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Wikipedia:ME

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:35, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate. This can be interpreted as the word "me". Therefore, the targets Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about YOU, Wikipedia:Autobiography or even Wikipedia:Shortcut could be relevant. Justjourney (talk) 04:48, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note I've merged these to a single nomination, the rationale for Wikipedia:Me was "for the same reason as Wikipedia:ME", Thryduulf (talk) 12:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep Wikipedia:ME / Keep Wikipedia:Me. We should always be very cautious when retargetting shortcuts because there is a great potential for confusion when the target is changed as some people will refer to the old target and others the new (how often do you check that a shortcut you use goes to the same place it did when you first learned it?). In this case WP:ME is a very well used shortcut with hundreds of incomming links, of those I spot checked all of them intended the current target. Me is much less used and has fewer incoming links (and one of those was intending Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth) but WP:ME and WP:Me are better targetting the same place I think. Other targets can be added to the hatnotes if they are plausible (and I don't think Wikipedia:Shortcut is). Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I agree entirely with Thryduulf. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per User:Thryduulf's argument that the shortcuts are already heavily used, but for the record, since I noticed the potential ambiguity myself, I've created Wikipedia:ME (disambiguation) and changed the hatnote to link to that instead. Duckmather (talk) 19:56, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Cinderella III: The Reverse of Time

Film is not titled this RanDom 404 (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to frwiki (i used google translate) it was one of the film's working titles. However, I could not find any sources online detailing this, and as the section (and indeed the entire article) has no references; only external links, I suspect it could just be an unsourced addition. I could not find anything stating anything about "Cinderella III: The Reverse of Time" in those external links either. So even though the plot of the movie does involve reversing time, the redirect itself is not appropriate because from what I can see, it was never a title of the movie. Therefore, I say delete. Plant🌱man (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target and creator talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:19, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_March_26
No tags for this post.