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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Euroleague Basketball Manager → Euroleague Basketball  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned in its targeted article. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 20:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Not currently mentioned and isn't a commonly searched term. If it's added to the parent article though I would say keep. CrimsonFox ^talk 12:01, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - The game series is clearly made by the governing body - https://www.euroleague.net/fan-corner/eb-video-game. But it's developed by U-PLAY Studios. Arguably, the main article could easily have some information on these released games, and in such case, the redirect would be suitible. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:06, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the original AfD closed with the redirect, as there was a non-notable article before this redirect. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Euroleague Basketball Manager (Dec 2016) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Nothing more frustrating than being redirected to a page with no mention or relevant information about the search term. Redirect can be re-recreated if someone ever deem it WP:DUE to be mentioned in the target.—Bagumba (talk) 11:48, 14 March 2019 (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 per WP:R#KEEP (Point 2; misspellings) (non-admin closure) –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:23, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Congential → Birth defect  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Misspelling of "congenital". Delete. Hildeoc (talk) 20:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: redirects from misspellings are useful to find typos such as this and to keep the link working until the typo is spotten. Certes (talk) 20:48, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is a very plausible typo/misspelling, and will help readers find the article they are looking for. Examples in notable sources include University of Nebraska Medical Centre, British Medical Journal, University Hospital Southampton, Pediatrics (Pediatrics (journal)) and many others. Thryduulf (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Exo-orbit → Orbital spaceflight  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm nominating this on behalf of Geoffrey.landis, who last month wrote that "the page that this redirects to does not include the term, which is in any case not notable enough for an article". I would add that no other article uses this term, and that most of the Google results refer to a song by Gemma Ray, which is not mentioned in her article. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2019 (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. Nothing to be disambiguated, as Trademark distinctiveness#Generic terms is the primary topic for Generic term. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:26, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Generic term (disambiguation) → Generic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Actually not a dab, but a superfluous redirect to Generic. Hence, to be deleted. Hildeoc (talk) 18:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The target is a disambiguation page which lists non-primary meanings of "generic term", I don't understand what the issue is? Thryduulf (talk) 18:35, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Won't the dab page at Generic name be a better target? – Uanfala (talk) 21:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly. If retargetting there is the consensus, the hatnote at Trademark distinctiveness#Generic terms will need updating. Thryduulf (talk) 11:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Generic term redirects to Trademark distinctiveness#Generic terms which has a hatnote to Generic. The redirect Generic term (disambiguation) is an orphan, and as the nom suggests, superfluous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:52, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. "Generic term" appears to not be ambiguous, so why are we directing a reader to a disambiguation page that proceeds to list no other instances of the phrase "generic term". —Xezbeth (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Generic name, a dab page that disambiguates between several meanings that also reasonably apply to "terms" rather than "names". – Uanfala (talk) 14:41, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Could always move Generic name to Generic term (disambiguation) as an option then. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:32, 15 March 2019 (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 disambiguate. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:04, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Salem-Keizer, Oregon → Salem, Oregon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Salem-Keizer → Salem-Keizer Volcanoes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Salem and Keizer are two separate cities. Should either be deleted per WP:XY or retargeted to Salem-Keizer Volcanoes, where Salem-Keizer already redirects. Smartyllama (talk) 01:21, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I have added Salem-Keizer given the nomination statement. To me, it just makes sense to also discuss the aforementioned redirect now since it seems to be affected by this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 09:58, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both per WP:REDLINK. After discovering an additional two pages that start with "Salem-Keizer", the article Salem-Keizer School District and the redirect Salem-Keizer Transit, it seems that there needs to be an article written about such a "Salem-Keizer" metropolitan district to help readers identity what "Salem-Keizer" is and encompasses. Steel1943 (talk) 10:07, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget both to Salem Metropolitan Statistical Area since that is essentially the {{R from incorrect name}} for a metropolitan area named "Salem-Keizer" per below, and represents the geographical area for all other subjects starting with "Salem-Keizer" mentioned thus far. Steel1943 (talk) 16:52, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I think it may be another name for the Salem Metropolitan Statistical Area, because Salem and Keizer are the two most populous cities in that MSA. PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 12:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And it does appear that some have used "Salem-Keizer" to refer to the Salem MSA, among other things. Maybe disambig with Salem Metropolitan Statistical Area, Salem-Keizer Volcanoes, Salem-Keizer School District and Cherriots (Salem-Keizer Transit). PorkchopGMX (talk with me - what i've done) 15:34, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate per PorkchopGMX. feminist (talk) 13:15, 17 March 2019 (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 G.I. Generation. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The Greatest Generation → Greatest Generation (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Where should this redirect point? See Talk:The Greatest Generation (book)#Requested_move_20_February_2019 for the dirty details. I am fully neutral. Red Slash 19:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to G.I. Generation and then add a dab to that page. --Philip Stevens (talk) 12:43, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Greatest Generation (disambiguation) because at this point it seems unclear whether the cohort or the book is the primary subject. We will then be able to see if one article gets significantly more page views than the other. The disambiguation page should be edited so that the book is not listed as the primary subject, but the book and cohort should be listed first. Kolya Butternut (talk) 01:08, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A title can not redirect to its own "Foo (disambiguation)" title; either this needs to point to an article, or the disambiguation page needs to be moved here. bd2412 T 04:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was a different title because of the word "The"? I'm not sure which title is better for the disambiguation page. Kolya Butternut (talk) 05:12, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Generation also redirects to Greatest Generation (disambiguation), so this needs to be sorted. --Philip Stevens (talk) 11:59, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both The Greatest Generation and Greatest Generation to G.I. Generation because it is the primary topic, and hatnote to Greatest Generation (disambiguation). -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:33, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Greatest Generation (disambiguation). As said above by Kolya Butternut, "at this point it seems unclear whether the cohort or the book is the primary subject." Paintspot Infez (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to G.I. Generation. I have known them mostly by the name "the Greatest Generation." (which is an epic name for a generational cohort imo) However, since the article is titled "G.I. Generation" there should most likely still be a link to The Greatest Generation (book) in the lead (where it currently points to The Greatest Generation). The book term has mostly outgrown the book overall, however. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:10, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: For background, there was a Requested Move discussion over moving G.I. Generation to The Greatest Generation (and moving the book article). Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I've carried out the move request for Greatest Generation (disambiguation) to move to Greatest Generation, so (if this consensus goes to that disambiguation page), that would be the new target. -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:19, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Dang I was right about to say that... –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:30, 15 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Move Greatest Generation (disambiguation) to The Greatest Generation. Per WP:THE, I don't believe the generation itself is the primary topic for "The Greatest Generation," which as an article title implies being the title of some work. It makes sense for the disambiguation page to reside at the page which contains the majority of titles it is disambiguating. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:59, 17 March 2019 (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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Pulpit robe → Geneva gown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Clerical robes → Clerical clothing  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

Many Christian clergymen wear robes in liturgical contexts, and some wear them in other settings as well. Since the pulpit is a feature of ecclesiastical architecture in many parts of Christianity, these robes are sometimes associated with it. However, there's no real difference between "pulpit robes" and "clerical robes"; both are robes worn by Christian clergymen because of their clerical positions. Consequently, they both ought to redirect to the same place. Is Clerical clothing best, or vestment, or something else? Geneva gown is a specific type of gown worn in some parts of Protestantism; it strikes me as over-precise (one can speak of Catholic priests wearing clerical robes, but they wouldn't wear Geneva gowns), but otherwise I don't have an opinion. Note that pulpit robes and clerical robe are both redlinks. Nyttend (talk) 19:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep #1: pulpit robe/gown is a legitimate term for a Geneva gown, usually associated with the protestant tradition. Retarget #2 to Vestment which concerns liturgical garments, to which I think "robe" is more likely to refer. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:23, 17 February 2019 (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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:VERYFINEPEOPLE → Wikipedia:No Nazis#Racist beliefs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

With all respect to the creator, I believe this term is too tied to one particular President to be a good redirect to the target. Maybe we can come up with something more appropriate. Legacypac (talk) 03:24, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Per Wikipedia:Shortcut, shortcuts are supposed to be abbreviations. This is not an abbreviation. Neither does this seem a particularly useful section of an essay to which to link. The shortcut has no links. --Bsherr (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (redirect creator). This is an essay and a bit of humour is permissible. --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Sir Joseph ^(talk) 04:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It works well as a shortcut. Once I found out about it, I began to use it. WP:VERYFINEPEOPLE takes me to where I want to go, and I can't ask any more in a shortcut. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 06:42, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There is no requirement that shortcuts be abbreviations (see e.g. WP:START, WP:SIGHELP, WP:EMERGING, WP:BJAODN, WP:HAPPYPLACE, wtc). All they have to be is a useful method of navigating to the target (per WP:R#KEEP point 5), and MJL and K.e.coffman both state it is useful. Thryduulf (talk) 13:08, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. People with racist beliefs are not 'very fine people'. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:20, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Tavix: it's called irony, just like WP:HAPPYPLACE. Thryduulf (talk) 13:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh my gosh that is the most amazing shortcut of all time. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - polemic undertone - racism is not something to joke about. ^Atsme 📣 📧 16:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed it isn't, but as nobody is joking about it I don't understand the relevance to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Semantics. Aside from the other mention of humor above, my interpretation of irony in this instance aligns with typically used as humor/sarcasm; therefore, VERYFINEPEOPLE as a shortcut (<-- there's the irony) for an essay about racism is a failed attempt at humor with -0- relevance to the targeted essay. ^Atsme 📣 📧 18:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Clarification: "Very fine people" refers to the following (bolding mine):

• ""Trump Defends White-Nationalist Protesters: 'Some Very Fine People on Both Sides'"
• "President Trump, ‘angry mobs’ and ‘very fine people’"
• "'You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides,' Trump said." And so on.

--K.e.coffman (talk) 06:24, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: please see above for the clarification. Of course, nobody on Wikipedia is calling racists "very fine people". Its use is ironic. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not a particularly useful function for a redirect to serve as an ironic jab at a politican. --Pudeo (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this deals with one particular comment by Trump, not racism in general. --the main use at this point is people opposing Trump. We might be able to find a directly relevant redirect. DGG ( talk ) 10:46, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Redirects are WP:CHEAP. If it helps someone find an essay easier, great (proven above). The issues raised about racism and irony are surely something to do with the content of the essay, not the redirect. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep WP:IRONYISALLOWED  :) ——SerialNumber54129 18:54, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Editors are at their liberty to express their opinions, including sarcasm and irony, in Wikipedia essays. This is also a quite well-known identifier, and it suits this section very well. Tsumikiria⧸ 🌹🌉 19:36, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Didn't we just not delete a bunch of transphobic bullshit some people put in the newsletter because it was supposedly 'funny'? Well, this is actually humorous, so what's good for the goose is good for the gander. PeterTheFourth (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2019 (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 disambiguate. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Whelen → Townsend Whelen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Many pages include this word including a place etc. Delete and let search results do the job Legacypac (talk) 01:14, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Convert to dab page. Also possible confusion with Whelan, Whalen & Whalan. PC78 (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I found it by misspelling Whelen. No problem if someone wants to make a dab Legacypac (talk) 01:24, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Convert to dab - ^Atsme 📣 📧 16:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've created the dab page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:10, 12 March 2019 (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.