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. It seems that general opinions on "double disambiguators" remain similar to the discussion from a year ago. Editors arguing to delete felt that the title's construction rendered it erroneous and functionally useless. Those arguing to keep felt it was harmless and unambiguous, as it targets a section in an article that serves a disambiguation-like purpose. I didn't see focused discussion on Steel1943's proposal of a new disambiguation page, so I'll just note it without comment or decision. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Bonnie Pointer (album) (disambiguation) → Bonnie Pointer#Albums  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I don't think this "double disambiguation" makes for a useful redirect. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - To the contrary, there are two albums named Bonnie Pointer, which need to be disambiguated, and they are disambiguated here. Fieari (talk) 01:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as useless; implausible as a search term, and not needed for linking. There are standard ways of disambiguating this, like (1978 album) vs (1979 album). And (disambiguation) redirects are there to support intentional links to disambiguation pages, but there is no such page here, only a section in the bio article. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Slightly weak keep per Fieari, WP:CHEAP, and my arguments at a certain mass nomination that took place last year. The target may not exactly be a disambiguation page, but it gives essentially the same function promised by the redirect's title (showing the two different albums "Bonnie Pointer (album)" could refer to). As for the double disambiguation, it doesn't really hurt things, and it's potentially helpful to searchers. Regards, SONIC678 06:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete after creating Bonnie Pointer (disambiguation) as a disambiguation page to perform the same functionality, and retarget Bonnie Pointer (album) there as a {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Steel1943 (talk) 13:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ah, even better! 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support creating dab per Steel. Web-julio (talk) 07:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete its existed since January and has always been a rediret, it was created because Bonnie Pointer (album) was a DAB but is no longer. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:48, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: there's a similar redirect. Web-julio (talk) 03:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. If this is deleted, how can we search for the album disambiguation? Unless Bonnie Pointer (album) is retargeted to the DAB.Web-julio (talk) 03:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Bonnie Pointer (album) already targets the same place as the redirect under discussion. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oops I didn't check, I assumed there was a real dab. Web-julio (talk) 07:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Fieari. Why is this even controversial? Anyone using this redirect will be taken to exactly what they are looking for, anyone not using this redirect is not impacted in any way. Thryduulf (talk) 12:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as harmless. C F A 💬 14:55, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Crouch (although his vote was Delete) and Fieari. When the target stops performing a disambiguation-like function, this may be renominated. Jay 💬 17:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to its creation being an error. Bonnie Pointer (album) should have never been a disambiguation at that title per WP:INCOMPDAB. Steel1943 is correct that if a disambiguation is desired, it would be at Bonnie Pointer (disambiguation) with Bonnie Pointer (album) being a redirect there. That said, both subjects are covered at Bonnie Pointer so a separate disambiguation page is unnecessary. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:32, 2 November 2024 (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).

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 23:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Swancore → Will Swan (musician)#Blue Swan Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Article has no mention of Swancore. I would like to however explain why this redirect exists, as it likely is that there is an extremely tiny microgenre known as "Swancore" which is basically just progressive post punk in the style of WIll Swan. But either way, there is no mention of swancore on the article, and I can't find many good sources for the genre so making it an article or making a mention of it on the WIll Swan article isn't a good idea. Gaismagorm (talk) 21:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Per nom. I think based on [1] there may be a WP:PROMO issue going on here as well, not by Spicy (the creator) but by someone going around adding the "Swancore" label to bands online. FOARP (talk) 12:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The only information Wikipedia has on Swancore is this discussion and a passing mention in a 2021 AfD, so the redirect is unhelpful. Thryduulf (talk) 12:40, 29 October 2024 (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).

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. There is consensus that the company is the primary topic for "Disney". (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 14:53, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Disney → The Walt Disney Company  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Several potential candidates (the company, the man, and multiple potential destinations for subsidiaries of the company), all frequently referred to as simply Disney. I'm honestly probably forgetting a few. I don't necessarily know which is the primary topic for this redirect, but if people's arguments at this discussion at The Walt Disney Company are any indication, the editors there sure believe it's not that article. Regardless, this redirect needs to be retargeted to a better destination. Ladtrack (talk) 18:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as is and discuss at Talk:The Walt Disney Company: This has been a topic of debate for quite some time as to what the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the term "Disney" refers to. In addition to the aforementioned discussion, there was also this debate at the Disney DAB from the start of this year raising concerns as to what is the primary topic. While there has been no consensus in those discussions, the majority of sources refer to "Disney" as the company or one of its units. I still believe that the company is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of "Disney", though if that is still in dispute or cannot be validated, then redirecting this to the DAB page at Disney (disambiguation) would be in order. I'm not sure if consensus has changed since those discussions, although I will note those discussions have typically with no consensus to retarget this redirect or move the article titles. There are appropriate disambiguation hatnotes at the Company article and in other articles where relevant, and I think this may benefit from a more thorough discussion at the Company article. Trailblazer101 (talk) 18:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hesitated a while at bringing this here, and if you noticed this proposal is written so as not to suggest that any of the potential targets are or are not the correct one, including the current target. If I was doing it myself I probably would have also selected the company, although I think it's close. However based on the discussion I linked I am almost certain that there is consensus at The Walt Disney Company that that article is not the primary topic for the term Disney. Admittedly this is my eye test because the proposal was asking for something else but of the twelve people that voted on that proposal, ten of them felt that the primary topic was not that article. Wikipedia is supposed to be consensus based and putting my own feelings aside I just cannot see how a term should redirect there when the people at that article think it should not. Ladtrack (talk) 17:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak move DAB to base name as no clear primary topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Very weak keep simply because the use of the disambiguator "(Disney)" on Wikipedia tends to refer to creations from the current target. Other than that, I completely understand what the nominator is relaying here, and if it weren't for this disambiguator in existent titles, I'd be supporting the proposed retarget/DAB move. Steel1943 (talk) 19:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is pretty neat, I didn't know you could search disambiguators this way. Unfortunately I don't think this is a particularly good indication of primary topic. This is an acceptable disambiguator because the company is known as Disney, but not necessarily because it is the primary topic for that term. For example, see results for the disambiguator "(Apple)". As you can see, it is dominated by the technology company even though it is not the primary topic for the term Apple. Ladtrack (talk) 17:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (1st choice) or Disambiguate (2nd choice). The company seems like the WP:PTOPIC to me, going by news articles and google hits alike. Fieari (talk) 01:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Move disambiguation page to base name because there is no clear primary topic. I opposed moving the Walt Disney Company to the shorter title Disney for that very reason, so I will be consistent on that issue. --Coolcaesar (talk) 04:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as mentioned in the above-linked Disney (disambiguation) discussion: the company article makes for a good broad-concept PRIMARYREDIRECT. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 23:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. By these days, the company is more famous and better known than the man who founded it. JIP | Talk 09:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Brainulator9 and JIP. When "Disney" is used alone without context it almost always refers to the corporation. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 29 October 2024 (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).

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 Aptos (typeface)#History which matches the result at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Grandview (typeface) and others. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Tenorite (typeface) → Microsoft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at target, meaning it's a somewhat misleading redirect for someone searching for the term expecting to find information on it. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Potentially retarget to Aptos (typeface)#History, which DOES have information on Tenorite-- what it is, where it came from, and its ultimate fate (in that it was passed over for the role of successor to Calibri in favor of the Bierstadt/Aptos font). I could also, for the record, see a Deletion as per WP:REDLINK; that said, I'm not sure Tenorite is notable on its own in any context other than the fact that it was a potential successor to Calibri and lost to Aptos.
  (Edit as per 14:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC): refined retarget location to match suggestion for the other three fonts) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:36, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Enwiki has nothing substative about this typeface. I have seperately nominated Grandview (typeface), Seaford (typeface) and Skeena (typeface) that are also mentioned at Aptos (typeface). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:19, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 13#Grandview (typeface) and others. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I would like to point out that Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Grandview (typeface) and others closed with an unambiguous retarget. This redirect, which probably should've been bundled with them, should be retargeted to match. I will note that I have, indeed, already voted in this discussion, so this comment should not count as a vote. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:45, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 13:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Lunamann and previous discussion. I disagree with the assessment that the information we have is "nothing substantive". We do have information on the subject of this search. It may not be much, but we do have it. We should give it to the user when asked for it. Fieari (talk) 06:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per above. Web-julio (talk) 07:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per the parallel discussion, but do not refine to the History section, as the Availability section is also useful. Jay 💬 15:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I will note that the Availability section is directly underneath the History section, and is, at least on my screen, onscreen when you use the Aptos (typeface)#History link. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2024 (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).

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 14:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 2028 CONCACAF Futsal Championship → CONCACAF Futsal Championship  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The target contains no information or mention on the 2028 event. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Given that the tournament is held every four years and the 2024 edition has already happened, I'm surprised not to see any mention of 2028 however the article does indeed not have any. I was also unable to find anything on google that even confirmed it will happen - literally the only thing I found that mentioned it was a DeviantArt post explicitly described as hypothetical. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Thryduulf. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 17:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Thryduulf. A7V2 (talk) 06:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Thryduulf and other supporters above as WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 13:18, 25 October 2024 (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).

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. Noting that the article content was blanked by the creator without substantial edits from others, so AfD would not have been necessary. ^Complex/_Rational 20:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• QSO J0100-2708 → Quasar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

More than a million quasars have been discovered. This particular one does not find mention on any wiki page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 16:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom; unlikely search term. 〜 Askarion ✉ 12:46, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete the author BLAR'd the article into a redirect as nonnotable; speedy delete as author blanking page -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:44, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Declined speedy as vandalism. No opinion on the merits. BusterD (talk) 03:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Why as vandalism? The author [2] converted to a redirect [3] with the comment it was nonnotable. All other edits to the page seem to be by bots or for copyediting. This would seem to be viable as a DB-author implied deletion criterion applicable. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• restore and send to afd per WP:BLAR. It seems to be an article before. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The author [4] of the article BLAR'd [5] it. So it seems the author doesn't think it's notable, per the edit comment on the BLAR. There doesn't seem to be other edits except bots and compyediting. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:47, 25 October 2024 (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).

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. And refine to the "Trinidad vs. Lovato" section. Jay 💬 15:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Félix Trinidad vs. Ray Lovato → Bruce Seldon vs. Mike Tyson  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target page. Seems like a hoax, but addition of the CSD template was reverted. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedly Keep the redirect is a title of a boxing match that was contested on the undercard of the target page. I plan to add a section on that bout similar to Bernard Hopkins vs. Robert Allen and Roy Jones Jr. vs. Bernard Hopkins. Sam11333 (talk) 10:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The target has now been updated to include the information about the redirect subject. Sam11333 (talk) 18:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless content is added. Content needs to come before the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 13:39, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to the newly added section Bruce Seldon vs. Mike Tyson#Trinidad vs. Lovato, but please Sam11333 in future create these kinds of redirects after adding relevant content, not before. A7V2 (talk) 06:15, 24 October 2024 (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).

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 withdrawn. Thryduulf (talk) 13:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Bussy Anand → Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I think that this is a party official, but since he isn't mentioned on the party's page, this redirect should be deleted. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Per WP:RFD#KEEP #3 and #5. I have also added a line about Bussy Anand on Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam. Let me know if it needs to be expanded a bit more. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Good enough. I'd like to withdraw the nomination. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:15, 22 October 2024 (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).

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• When the horizon's at the bottom, it's interesting. When the horizon's at the top, it's interesting. When the horizon's in the middle, it's boring as shit! → The Fabelmans  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is a quote from Ford to Sammy, supposedly. However, it is an unlikely search term and not particularly useful as a redirect, among the millions of quotes that exist, and only appears within a reference excerpt. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 16:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete implausible redirect. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Implausible search term. Not mentioned at target article. FOARP (talk) 21:13, 24 October 2024 (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).

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 White Party (Sean Combs). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ain't no party like a diddy party → Sean Combs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Ain't no party like a Diddy party → Sean Combs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Diddy parties → Sean Combs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Diddy party → Sean Combs sexual misconduct allegations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not listed at target. If kept, I'm also curious about redirecting to Sean Combs sexual misconduct allegations, given that the quote is related in popular media. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete first two as implausible redirects. However, I'm inclined to keep Diddy parties; the term is in fairly common use in recent conversations about Diddy and the allegations against him, enough that I can certainly envision people searching it. The term may not remain relevant in the long term, but I think it's currently likely to be useful. Neutral on whether the target should be Sean Combs or Sean Combs sexual misconduct allegations. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 13:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Diddy party exists and targets Sean Combs sexual misconduct allegations. It also isn't mentioned at the target. I feel like the term could be added but I am staying as far away from finding sources for it as I can. Should it be bundled with this? mwwv ^converse∫_edits 17:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just found out about White Party (Sean Combs). Any opinions on retargeting anything there? mwwv ^converse∫_edits 18:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have added Diddy party to the nomination. (Pinging Mwwv for notice on this.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all to White Party (Sean Combs) as the actual "parties" that are being referred to {{The Sharpest Lives|💬|✏️|ℹ️}} 16:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Retarget per The Sharpest Lives. Web-julio (talk) 03:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all per The Sharpest Lives. Sidenote: Diddy party was recently a target of vandalism. Jalen Barks (Woof) 23:53, 26 October 2024 (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).

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 refine to their respective anchors. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 14:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Kahako → Macron (diacritic)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Kahakos → Macron (diacritic)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Kahakō → Macron (diacritic)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Tohutō → Macron (diacritic)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Pōtae → Macron (diacritic)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

Per WP:RFOR

Also nominating Kahakos, Kahakō, Tohutō, and Pōtae. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• These terms are all mentioned in the article. Either keep or refine to anchors to the relevant paragraphs. Also create Tohuto and Potae as {{a2r}} / {{r from ASCII}}. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 21:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep unless ambiguous: clear and strong affinity. Would lean against refining. J947 ‡ ^edits 00:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't see how any language besides Latin can claim a strong affinity to the macron, which is used in dozens of languages. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refine all variants of Kahakō to Macron (diacritic)#Kahakō. Refine all variants of Tohutō and Pōtae (with further variants created as per Tamzin) to Macron (diacritic)#Tohutō. (The section defines Pōtae as an alternate name for Tohutō in Māori.)

WP:RLANG (cited above as WP:RFOR) does not apply here; the terms redirected from are explicitly defined and explained in relation to the language they came from (Hawaiian and Māori respectively), which means they do, indeed, have strong affinity. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Refine per Lunamann. Thryduulf (talk) 13:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to anchors. YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 14:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine exactly as suggested by Lunamann. A7V2 (talk) 06:18, 24 October 2024 (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).