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. ✗plicit 03:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Kilgore (Smudge) → Kilgore (band)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

this redirect makes no sense. the band was called, at various points, either "Kilgore", "Smudge", or "Kilgore Smudge", but never "Kilgore (Smudge)" -- FMSky (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – {{R from move}}, used to be the page title for ~3 years and still gets regular page views. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 19:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:53, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Randi Moth. The evidence is that the redirect continues to be useful. Thryduulf (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the band was called "Smudge" at one point, and so that helps to differentiate it from other usages of the word "Kilgore". Plant🌱man (talk) 17:59, 18 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).

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 WLBJ. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:37, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• WLBJ (defunct) → WLBJ (Kentucky)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This disambiguator may itself be ambigous; WLBJ-LP is also defunct. (This is a large part of why "defunct" is no longer used as a disambiguator for broadcast station articles.) This may need to be retargeted to WLBJ as an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, WLBJ-LP has been nominated for deletion; if that article is deleted, that might eliminate the need for the WLBJ disambiguation page and render this RfD all but moot. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not a very useful redirect apparently. Drdpw (talk) 04:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait for the AFD. Retarget to DAB if it's not deleted, otherwise delete. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 07:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• The AFD closed as redirect to Annunciation Radio. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Drdpw. If there was an active WLBJ station article, then it made sense to have the "defunct" disambiguator. All we have are two defunct ones, we don't need a "defunct" disambiguator to redirect to a disambig page. This was the earlier title of the Kentucky station page, so at that time it made sense. Jay 💬 11:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The AFD closed as redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to the disambiguation page. This is the former article title, which makes it a plausible search term, but ambiguous. When we have plausible but ambiguous search terms we disambiguate because that is significantly more helpful to readers than deletion. I see no reason why deletion would be preferable here. Thryduulf (talk) 23:27, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plant🌱man (talk) 23:40, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Thryduulf. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:48, 18 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).

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) Cremastra _talk 17:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Disney's "Teacher's Pet" → Teacher's Pet (TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Why does this has quotation marks around it? RanDom 404 (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is indicating that "Teacher's Pet" is the title of a work by Disney and not a person who is teacher's pet to someone named Disney. Thryduulf (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Thryduulf. This redirect is harmless, unambiguous, and potentially helpful—the quotation marks don't really hurt anything here, and the target is exactly what the redirect promises. Regards, SONIC678 03:03, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Chiming in to point out that this looks similar to a lot of RFDs that get deleted for being WP:UNNATURAL:

Titles with punctuation, obscure errors, additions, or removals that have no specific affinity to one title over any other: e.g. being in quotations.

I think the difference is that titles for TV shows are often put in quotes to indicate that they are titles, and so it is reasonable to anticipate someone typing this title this way, Wikipedia page title conventions notwithstanding. I don't feel strongly about this, just hoping to help the nominator and commentators understand each other's rationale. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 02:10, 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).

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. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 11:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Suada Dilbreovic → Suada and Olga bridge#Suada Dilberović  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Bot-generated sibling to Suada Dilbreović Joy (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete when I googled "Suada Dilbreovic", I only came up with two results: the aforementioned redirect and this (apparently a glossary; the page did not load for me). Seems to me that it's not a common misspelling. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:00, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. While Suada Dilbreović exists this is a very useful {{R without diacritics}}. If that redirect is deleted this one can be deleted under WP:CSD#G8. Thryduulf (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Exactly, if that one made sense, this one would, too. As that one actually doesn't, this one doesn't, either. --Joy (talk) 08:01, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Thryduulf Said redirect has been deleted… Plant🌱man (talk) 15:17, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreamy Jazz do you mind getting rid of this one, after you deleted the one below? No point keeping this loose end. --Joy (talk) 14:12, 30 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).

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. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Suada Dilbreović → Suada and Olga bridge#Suada Dilberović  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Leftover from a typo fix from 2006. Seems way too intricate to be a common typo. Joy (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete same as #Suada Dilbreovic. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this and #Suada Dilbreovic should be merged as one RfD. What do you say, Joy? Plant🌱man (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course, I just did it this way because of the tooling, the're obviously linked. --Joy (talk) 03:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy I have found User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD very helpful for cases like this. Rusalkii (talk) 17:55, 18 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).

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 Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7. Thryduulf (talk) 18:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2024 Justice Department Resignations → 2025 U.S. Department of Justice resignations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Misleading - no one resigned in 2024, this started Feb 2025. Rusalkii (talk) 20:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not helpful in any way. Just like 2023 Justice Department Resignations, 2022 Justice Department Resignations etc. which don't exist for that reason. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I made it in error. Please delete. Remember (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rusalkii Should this be tagged with {{db-g7}}? Plant🌱man (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert in speedy deletion criteria, but it does seem to match. Rusalkii (talk) 17:52, 18 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).

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. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Hate is wrong → Wikipedia:Hate is disruptive  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

IMO this redirect is actively disruptive purely by its existence, as the fact that it exists implies that Wikipedia censors editors by virtue of the opinions they hold. As the personal essay (not policy or guideline page) to which it redirects—Wikipedia:Hate is disruptive—makes clear, "Hate is wrong" is pretty much the opposite of our actual policy; we take a very dim view of hate speech because of its potential to disrupt discussions, but we don't and never will make it a Wikipedia position that any given opinion is unequivocally wrong. Keeping this redirect would serve no useful purpose, and its existence has the potential to actively mislead good-faith new editors into getting themselves into quite serious trouble should it inspire someone to appoint themselves the moral arbiters of right and wrong.  ‑ Iridescent 18:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. While I do personally agree with the sentiment expressed in the redirect, my entire point in creating HID was to avoid framing things in terms of right or wrong. As I write in the essay, Wikipedia policy does not concern itself with people's private views. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete - per nom. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk • contribs) 19:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep WP:HID is a more general version of more specific essays such as WP:NONAZIS, WP:NORACISTS, WP:NOCONFED, and WP:NOQUEERPHOBES. WP:NONAZIS especially makes it very clear that Nazism is both morally and factually wrong, and it's got tons of explicit endorsers.

More broadly though, we already do have to answer questions of right and wrong here. One of the major policy justifications for WP:BLP is the possibility of real world harm to living people. The point of WP:NOTCENSORED is that we think that censorship is wrong. The whole reason we're here is that we think a free online encyclopedia is a good thing to make.

Basically: whether or not this was Tamzin's explicit intent, part of the core point of WP:HID is also that hate is wrong. In fact part of the point of us saying that any behavior is disruptive is that it's wrong, since we're all here to make an encyclopedia and think that's a good thing to do. Loki (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to write an essay about how hate is wrong, feel free to write it. HID, however, is not that essay. It is a related but very much distinct point. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 01:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I respect that you believe that but you do not own this essay. Loki (talk) 02:09, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying I own the essay. I do think I've probably read through the whole thing more times than anyone else in the world, and there is not a word in it commenting on the morality of hate. Whether a redirect will be misleading is usually a mainspace question, but it applies in all namespaces. Here, someone following a redirect titled "Hate is wrong" will be confused to find themselves on an essay that does not say, at any point, that hate is wrong, but rather says things like Under this essay, bigoted editors are not sanctioned for their ideologies; they are sanctioned for their behavior, Focusing on ideology, in justifying sanctions, raises many difficult-to-answer questions, needlessly complicates things, and leads to drama, bigots can edit here ... if they edit without engaging in any hate speech or hateful conduct, and again, Wikipedia policy does not concern itself with people's private views.

Again, if you want to write an essay about hate being wrong in the context of Wikipedia, that's fine! But this is not an essay that makes that argument, and therefore it is misleading to redirect that phrase to it. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 02:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you think HID is a more generalized version of NONAZIS and NORACISTS, you fundamentally misunderstand it. HID is, explicitly, from its outset, a concurrence-in-part and dissent-in-part to those essays, and has an entire section on this distinction. (NOCONFED and NOQUEERPHOBES postdate HID, but the same logic applies.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 02:45, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Tamzin. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Tamzin. Hating nazis is correct. The point of WP:NOTCENSORED is that we think that censorship is wrong. No, the WP:NOT policy is a neutral description of what the community agreed Wikipedia is and is not, and it does not and should not express an opinion about if censorship outside of Wikipedia is wrong or right. Polygnotus (talk) 07:40, 18 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).

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 23:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Geek fraternities → Fraternity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Unlikely misspelling of "Greek" as in "Greek fraternity" which may be considered a non-neutral term. In addition, the singular version of this redirect, Geek fraternity, does not exist and has never existed. Steel1943 (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as confusing, a "geek" fraternity sounds like one full of geeks, not lexically challenged Greeks. Rusalkii (talk) 19:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unlikely search term. Plant🌱man (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RETURNTORED as a possible article topic on non-stereotypical college fraternities. Fieari (talk) 07:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: a misspelling that is unlikely to be used for future searches. Even if spelled correctly (Greek), this is not a phrase with a Google presence. Rublamb (talk) 23:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Pinging BD2412 just for fun, because his 2005 AfD suggestion created this redirect! Jay 💬 18:59, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have heard it said that every seven years, you become an entirely new person. In any case, I can't be held responsible for saying something like this twenty years ago. BD2412 T 19:02, 24 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).

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 Jason H. Moore. Jay 💬 18:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• TPOT → Pennsylvania Opera Theater  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

An anonymous IP erroneously changed the acronym of the Pennsylvania Opera Theater (POT) to TPOT in this edit. This minor but incorrect change went unnoticed and the redirect was created in error. 4meter4 (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment One of the sources in the article says the abbreviation is "TPOT" but it appears to include the word "the", and I haven't reviewed the other sources yet as to if they say the same thing. I did a search and the only other mentions are Radio TPOT (doesn't have an article), and minor mentions including one in jacksfilms (that one here doesn't have an article either for reasons.) Nijika・🥁・📐 17:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral. OhioMan10 (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - seems like a source cited on the article used "TPOT". It was published in 1991, so there's no citogenesis concern. ObserveOwl (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, seems like unlikely search result. Most people searching for "TPOT", especially now, are expecting to see something about the season of web series Battle for Dream Island (which is not on Wikipedia, see WP:BFDI), not the Pennsylvania Opera Theater. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 17:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reason to delete. We're not responsible for non-notable meanings of a term. Otherwise, we'd have to delete most {{r from initialism}}s. Paradoctor (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that follows - "we delete all initialisms where the overwhelming primary topic doesn't have an article, such that redirecting to our best article for it would surprise most readers" strikes me as a totally reasonable policy and I suspect doesn't actually get most of the current redirects. (Of the first five random initialism redirects I checked, four had the target as the clearly primary topic and one didn't seem to have a primary topic). Rusalkii (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Primary topics are notable, by definition, and they have an article, by definition: the topic to which the term should lead. I was talking about non-notable meanings. BFDI is not notable. That's why BFDI exists, but redirects to a German federal agency most likely not searched for by users entering "BFDI" into the search box. Or do you feel like nominating that one for deletion, too? Paradoctor (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not feel like nominating that one for deletion because I'm pretty sure I just saw that discussion and I am not in the habit of re-litigating lost battles. My primary point was that in fact the case where the non-Wikipedia-notable meaning of the term is the primary topic (not as a term of art, but just as "what do most people seem to be looking for") are not anywhere near common enough that, if this was adopted as a principle at RfD, we'd need to delete most of them. Rusalkii (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Jason H. Moore § Research. If you want to include the theatre meaning, a hatnote can be added there. Paradoctor (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Jason H. Moore. tree-based pipeline optimization tool (TPOT) is sort of unpopular (most people searching TPOT will see Battle for Dream Island, but that's not on Wikipedia), but tree-based pipeline optimization tool (TPOT) appears to be the most notable TPOT. 49.145.100.19 (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Jason H. Moore (i'm User:Someone-123-321 by the way, but due to reasons the reply system I'm using doesn't work on Chrome :[). Ignoring the obvious target (which we don't have nor should we) this seems like the best target for now. 65.181.23.139 (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: After discounting the vote of the blocked IP (although he was blocked prior to the previous relist), this discussion can do with some more opinion on the latest suggested target, or any further information on the possible alternative acronym of the current target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Jason H. Moore Most hits are for BFDI, but this seems like an acceptable target since searches do pull results for this term. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:08, 17 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).

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 Richard St George Mansergh-St George. Whatever its fate may be. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 07:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Richard Mansergh St George → British Army  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is a page for an officer but it links to British Army. I don't think many readers are looking for the British Army page when they open this page. PercyPigUK (talk) 16:38, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This is an avoided double redirect and {{R from move}} for Richard St George Mansergh-St George. I've !voted on that discussion to restore the article and send to AfD. I'm remaining neutral on this specific redirect for now pending the outcome of the other discussion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:25, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as dependent on the other redirect. If that is deleted this one can be also, if it isn't then it will remain a good and useful redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 14:35, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Richard St George Mansergh-St George, which I restored below. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:06, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Richard St George Mansergh-St George. Per CycloneYoris. Guliolopez (talk) 22:04, 25 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).

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 restore and send to AfD. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Richard St George Mansergh-St George → British Army  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is a page for an officer but it links to British Army. I don't think many readers are looking for the British Army page when they open this page. PercyPigUK (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore this version and send to AfD Looking at the page history, this appears to be the last version that was an actual article. In the next edit, User:Cowpoke49 blanked the page and asserted a copyvio. However, User:Dl2000 shortly thereafter BLARed the page, leaving us with the situation today except for a brief period of time when User:Ursusvenandi restored the content before BLARing it again. Clearly, the nominator is right that the redirect is unhelpful. But it seems there was never a proper determination if the article was actually a copyvio or even a notable subject. AfD is the better venue for that discussion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:24, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore per Presidentman. Thryduulf (talk) 14:33, 18 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).

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation) → 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Redirect created due to misidentification of World Kabaddi with World Kabaddi Federation and subsequent page move. Later reverted after discussion at Talk:2019 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)#Governance of global Kabaddi and World Cups. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or keep, whichever CX Zoom prefers: Its only potential usefulness would be to help someone who has read one of the off-Wikipedia articles that misidentified the sponsor of the World Kabaddi event or to help someone who was trying to track the history of how articles evolved on Wikipedia, but both of these are unlikely. On the other hand, its existence could add to the confusion that is inherent in trying to understand the world of kabaddi. The World Kabaddi Federation will not be holding a Kabaddi World Cup event in 2025. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not gonna lie, I was torn about this one. On one hand, the World Kabaddi Federation did not organise the 2025 Kabaddi World Cup. On the other hand, I could see a user confusing World Kabaddi with World Kabaddi Federation, especially since the World Kabaddi Federation’s website is https://worldkabaddi.org. But I’m sure that someone typing “2025 World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation)” into the search bar would see “2025 World Cup (World Kabaddi)” in the results. Also, because the target article does not mention the World Kabaddi Federation (as I’m sure any ardent Kabaddi fan would notice), I think that to delete it would be the best option. Plant🌱man (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A redlink will clearly reveal that no such world cup exists. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:49, 18 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).

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Christian democratic union of germany, CDU → Christian Democratic Union of Germany  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Christian Democratic union, CDU → Christian Democratic Union of Germany  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• Christian Democratic Union (Germany), → Christian Democratic Union of Germany  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• CDU(Political Party in Deutschland/Germany) → Christian Democratic Union of Germany  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete all. The first three per WP:UNNATURAL (Titles that have both a name and an abbreviation, Titles with punctuation, obscure errors, additions, or removals that have no specific affinity to one title over any other), the fourth per WP:RDAB (disambiguated titles with extra, missing, or misplaced spaces and brackets). None of these redirects are linked from any pages. Xoontor (talk) 14:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• the first two appear to have been created as articles in 2005 by User:Sunkist118 and promptly redirected by other users.
• the third appears to have been created in 2013 by User:Jamesx12345 as a redirect because it was linked to in some article (most likely a typo; now fixed, of course).
• the last one was created this year by User:Save2asdfj as a redirect to the current target with some text below that says, “is a Conservative Party in Germany”. The text below the redirect was promptly removed, so it just became a redirect. -Plant🌱man (talk) 17:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if someone were actually looking for these, they’d just type in “CDU”, “CDU (Germany)”, “Christian Democratic Union (Germany)”, “Christian Democratic Union”, “Christian Democratic Union of Germany”, or the German name of the party - not these titles. Third one comes pretty close but the extra comma is unneeded. Plant🌱man (talk) 17:33, 17 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).

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2026 Eliteserien → Eliteserien  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, we need to stamp out the perceived need to create entries way ahead of time. It's just utterly useless. Geschichte (talk) 08:29, 18 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).

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2026 Latvian Higher League → Latvian Higher League  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, we need to stamp out the perceived need to create entries way ahead of time. It's just utterly useless. Geschichte (talk) 08:29, 18 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).

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2026 Kazakhstan Cup → Kazakhstan Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 17 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).

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:32, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Harry Bōlz → Elon Musk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Musk changed his twitter handle to this (a meme coin) for like two seconds a month ago. No one calls him this and it's not mentioned in target. Possibly relevant: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_February_19#Kekius_Maximus, another memecoin handle of his. Rusalkii (talk) 02:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete irrelevant at this point; also, the people looking for this redirect will probably know that “Harry Bōlz” is Elon Musk and therefore they could just search up “Elon Musk” themselves. Not a very helpful redirect IMO. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:20, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as obscure alias at best --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:45, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I don't know how long he was known as "Harry Bōlz" on Twitter for but it was longer than 2 seconds. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 04:55, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I believe they meant it as a figure of speech. Kinda like “15 minutes of fame” if that helps. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @GoldenBootWizard276 two seconds was a joke, yes. I meant to convey "a short period of time". Rusalkii (talk) 05:42, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete obviously obscure User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 17:16, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per everyone above. Anyone searching this either (a) knows that Harry Bōlz is Elon Musk, and could therefore find the article Elon Musk if they want information about him in general rather than the Harry Bōlz stunt or (b) does not know, and will not be helped by this redirect which does not explain the connection. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:13, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Gag name, which is what this is. Just since Musk changed his Twitter handle to a term much like Mike Rotch, Hugh Jass, Gabe Itch, or Seymour Butz—doesn't mean he owns a specific gag name because "one time he used it because he was promoting crypto" or whatever. BarntToust 23:42, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all. Gag name does have a mention of Harry Baals (who was a real person) but this is just an example in that page, and retargeting to the gag page will be too much of a stretch. Jay 💬 12:33, 28 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).

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. Hog Farm _talk 02:49, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Dengismmm → Deng Xiaoping Theory  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Three m's is not a plausible typo. Cannot find any usage of this offwiki. Rusalkii (talk) 01:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment seems to have been the result of an erroneous move by User:LaparohMesa (see here). Also, User:Rusalkii, just out of curiosity, how do you find all these erroneous redirects? Plant🌱man (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPP, I patrol redirects. Rusalkii (talk) 04:30, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But this (and Harry Bōlz) were created a month ago. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the last of the backlog is currently at Feb 5th, if you ignore the BLARs. I almost always patrol from the back of the queue. Rusalkii (talk) 04:43, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks! Plant🌱man (talk) 04:54, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible; result of an erroneous move that was reverted. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to add - self-reverted by the person who originally performed the move. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:32, 17 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).

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 Peter Brötzmann. Jay 💬 15:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• BRÖ → Austria  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The only place I can find referring to Austria as "BRÖ" is a post on an incel forum, which I will spare you all. Not mentioned in target. We have a few mentions of Peter Brötzmann's label by this title, possibly it should be retargetted there? Rusalkii (talk) 01:21, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. There is a French musician who uses the stage name Brö (not to be confused with the Danish Bro (singer)) but based purely on English-language sources I'm not sure they are notable (I haven't looked for sources in other languages, I would expect most in-depth coverage to be in French), and we don't have any mention of her on the English or French Wikipedias that I can find. If she is/becomes notable then her article would be at the sentence case title not the all-caps seen here so would be distinguished by hatnotes. de:BRÖ was deleted on 5 March this year with a summary that Google translates as "Unwanted forwarding" which sounds like it was also a redirect, but I don't know to what target. Thryduulf (talk) 01:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: de:BRÖ was indeed deleted as an "unwanted redirect" on German Wikipedia, but I can't tell what it redirected to. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:07, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Per de:Special:Redirect/logid/139079094, it was created by the same user as its enwiki equivalent, 3 minutes earlier, with the target de:Österreich (Austria). @Der Eberswalder: I see you haven't edited in a month, but I'll throw you a ping anyways. Can you explain why you created this? I am asking this as an administrator, because at face value your action appears to be vandalism. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 00:55, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  My guess would be that this is a modification of the abbreviation for Bundesrepublik Deutchland with "Deutschland" replaced by "Österreich". Obscure non-neutral name either way. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:45, 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).