Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17: Difference between revisions

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 17, 2023.

• Invest 91-L → Invest (meteorology)#Designation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect, plus in this case, the hyphenated usage is extremely uncommon. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Invest 98L → Invest (meteorology)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect. It is going to be confusing to readers looking for particular seasons. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Invest 99-L → Invest (meteorology)#Designation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect, plus in this case, the hyphenated usage is extremely uncommon. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Microsoft 98 → Windows 98  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Microsoft Vista → Windows Vista  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Microsoft 10 → Windows 10  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Microsoft 11 → Windows 11  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Same reason redirects like Microsoft 95, Microsoft 2000, Microsoft 7, Microsoft 8, and Microsoft 8.1 were deleted: All are implausible redirects; I don't see anyone referring to a Windows version as a "Microsoft (version)". Colgatepony234 (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Efectul Von Restorff → Von Restorff effect  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Romanian-language translation of article name, which has no connection to Romania ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Invest 93L → 2023 Atlantic hurricane season#Invest 93L  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Invest 93L is a common designation for tropical disturbances in the Atlantic Ocean by the National Hurricane Center. Invest designation is reused each year and year after year (cycling through 90L to 99L and then starting again with 90L). Thus there can be and always are multiple Invest 93L systems each year. This shouldn't redirect to a specific article, as that is highly misleading. United States Man (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per large media attention related to “Invest 93L. Noting, this was renamed to be “Tropical Depression 10” an hour ago, so the redirect is still useful. Sources: Florida Governor [1][2][3][4]. Googling “Invest 93L” pulls up a lot of news articles from the last 24 hours. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 93L has been and will be used many times. This redirect is misleading and will quickly become obsolete. United States Man (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or retarget to Invest (meteorology). Per the nomination, this designation refers to many different weather systems across many years. The current system is no longer 93L and will be known as Tropical Depression Ten (and likely Tropical Storm/Hurricane Idalia) hereafter. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete "Invest 93L" will likely be used numerous times in the future and has been used several times in the past, and will become obsolete as per above. Tails Wx (they/them) ⚧ 22:38, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, If the 2023 version above was bad, then this is way way worst for the reasons in that discussion spread over every single season. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:40, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Tails. DarkSide830 (talk) 14:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Invest (meteorology) other invest links. 199.76.113.24 (talk) 17:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. In the future, this designation will be used if some disturbance gives it that designation. HurricaneEdgar 10:00, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Invest (meteorology) which explains the designation and how it's used, and identifies the range of numerals that are used with it. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Invest (meteorology) per above. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:14, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. ChessEric 19:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:29, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete — and not retarget because it would cause confusion during the season due to the media mentioning invest numbers. We should minimize reader surprise.—Jasper Deng (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thinking long-term, it's not a bad redirect to have if we retarget. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @TornadoLGS: Saying it's "not a bad redirect" without supporting statements is not an argument.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:39, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Jasper Deng: To clarify, it's a not a bad redirect for someone who might see 93L mentioned in the future and wonder what an invest is. TornadoLGS (talk) 01:16, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • @TornadoLGS: But they probably would be looking for a specific system, not the article on invests in general. Overall there's no way to keep this redirect without it being confusing.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:37, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete without redirecting — an ambiguous in that the designation is used multiple times in a given hurricane season, and, nobody uses the invest numbers after the particular system either becomes a tropical (subtropical) cyclone or dissipates. It serves no no lasting, or even transient, value as a redirect. Drdpw (talk) 01:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget; a redirect to a page that explains the designation is better than nothing. Most of the reasons for deleting are only reasons not to link it to a specific system or create a disambiguation page; some people could be looking for a specific system, but an explanation that the designation is temporary and is used for different systems is more useful than search results similar to "Invest 91L" (where most are not found, and most mentions in articles are in references where it doesn't refer to the subject of the article). Invest 93L (2023) and Invest 99-L (August 2016) were deleted, but others without the year were retargeted: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 18#Invest 99-L and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 27#Invest 98L. Peter James (talk) 11:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Peter James: It is completely unsustainable to create such a disambiguation page. This designation is used many times per season and has been in the past, so we would have hundreds of entries, and not always with reliable sources connecting them to particular systems or seasons. Many don't develop and would not be notable. It would not be any less confusing. Any other redirects of this sort should not be kept either.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree; that is why it would be more useful to retarget to Invest (meteorology). Peter James (talk) 19:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Which is confusing. There's no way to satisfactorily keep this as a redirect or disambiguation. The only option is deletion.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hindu language → Hindi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also refer to the Sanskrit language used in Hindu texts like the Vedas Isla (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep with hatnote I think the misspelling is far more plausible than someone looking for Sanskrit, but a hatnote should be able to catch anyone looking for the latter. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:23, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unimportant comment: Keep with hatnote??? But hatnote is being discussed as a redirect right above this discussion, and there hasn't been any argument to keep it... Kind of suspicious... Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Most likely to be a misspelling of Hindi. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget with hatnote to Sanskrit. If someone wants to search for the "hindu language" referring to sanskrit, and they are redirected to hindi (against their choice) which has a hatnote "for the hindu language, follow this link", that is not great page design in my opinion. If I were the searcher in that situation, I feel I would be annoyed that my typo was redirected to an article I didn't want, with the actual article I correctly typed in being linked as a hatnote; it may feel like we "expect people to get the name wrong before we believe people intended to search for the hindu language".

I'm not an expert in this area so I'm not sure which is a more accurate description of "hindu language"; hindi or sanskrit. Whichever situation is the best description, I don't think we should treat this as a "typo of anything" because I feel seeking out the hindu language is a valid search term. So, whichever target is the more accurate "hindu language" should be the redirect target, with the other option being listed as a hatnote. My perspective is that sanskrit is more accurate for this task. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 17:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I doubt it would work, but could you set an anchor in an infobox? The "Languages" section of the infobox in Hindus seems like a good target, but there's no easy way to get readers there. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 16:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Split the difference and target Hindi#History. - jc37 19:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Convert it into a disambiguation, by putting contents like "Hindu language" may refer to: (1) Hindustani languages, the predominant group of languages of Hindustan, (2) Sanskrit, the liturgical language of Hinduism, (3) Hindi, the most widely spoken language of Hindustan as well as among the Hindustani languages (even more than Urdu of Pakistan), (4) Any of the languages predominantly spoken by the Category:Hindu ethnic groups. --Haoreima (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Reagen, and for consistency with Hindu (language). No opinion on hatnoting - if some people interpret Sanskrit as the language of the Hindus, past or present, then why not? Hindustani is different, hence I don't support the disambiguations. Jay 💬 05:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, retarget, or disambiguate? I'm reading Haoreima's "keep" !vote as "disambiguate".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Hatnote → Wikipedia:Hatnote  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Bad XNR. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Keep given that this is Wikipedia jargon, is it conceivable that anyone will be expecting to land somewhere else? Polyamorph (talk) 20:07, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, this has come up two times previously, and was previously the stubbiest stub that stubbed. J947 † ^edits 01:39, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment do we have a list of Wikipedia jargons where this can point to? --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Doubt we have one in mainspace. I don't think the sources would exist for it either, unfortunately, but I haven't actually looked. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:14, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Listen to Wikipedia, an art project whose full title is "Hatnote: Listen to Wikipedia". Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 00:46, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this retarget provided a hatnote (heh) is added pointing back to Wikipedia:Hatnote. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • This would be acceptable to me Polyamorph (talk) 11:00, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm indifferent about meta-hatnotes. I feel that readers shouldn't be inundated with internal project cruft. On the other hand I enjoy the irony of a hatnote about hatnotes. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my comment in the 2022 RfD. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete with Hatnotes and Hat note as unnecessary Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirects. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:34, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or ReTarget per Ivanvector. XNRs can be necessary at times, but in general, I think most editors know how to type WP: when searching for a project page. - jc37 19:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Listen to Wikipedia per Ivanvector and add hatnote per Lenticel. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 15:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:47, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep "Hatnote" is Wikipedia jargon that a newbie is likely to encounter and may be confused what it means, and the redirect points to the correct place to answer that question. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep (no opinion on target) because, if nothing else, this may qualify as an {{R with history}}. (This may depend on the strictness of different editors’ interpretation of ‘substantive page history’, though.) ^user:A smart kitten_meow 13:56, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget while an article more about how Wikipedia works similar to Articles for deletion going to Deletion of articles on Wikipedia, Listen to Wikipedia at least mentions the term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – viable XNR, unlikely to be searched outside a Wikipedia context, and Listen to Wikipedia is a partial-title match that I really do not find convincing as a target (probably worth a hatnote but not more than that). It also definitely gets use, with about 80 hits a month over the past year. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:15, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Redirects from mainspace to other namespaces are unideal. SWinxy (talk) 05:26, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete, keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Vixy Reinard → List of Star Fox characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:55, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Appears to be an extremely minor character. This is probably a better fit for a fan wiki than Wikipedia. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:07, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• The page content was merged to the target and I have tagged the redirect as a {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 20:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 02:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per {{R from merge}}, in order to maintain edit history and attribution. ^user:A smart kitten_meow 14:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  She is not mentioned in the target, so if there was ever any merge done, it is no longer relevant to preserve attribution. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Here's a link to the merged content. I believe that we actually are supposed to preserve attribution in such cases, so that we don't have copyright problems if someone ever decides to restore any of that content from the page history. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This is also my understanding. ^user:A smart kitten_meow 20:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Countrycore → Country rap  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

non existent term FMSky (talk) 01:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Cottagecore ({{R from synonym}}). As mentioned briefly in an AfD comment, this seems to be a term that can be used at least somewhat synonymously with the proposed target. I had trouble finding many good sources that include this phrase from which to assist my judgement, but the ones I found seem to refer to the aesthetic rather than the musical genre. [5] (The interiors are more Belgravia bling than traditional countrycore); [6] (…Marine Serre, known for its crescent moon iconography, mixed and matched plaids and checks in a countrycore-inflected frenzy); [7] (Occasionally referred to as farmcore or countrycore, cottagecore romanticises the idea of living off the land.). While not a source in itself, I think it’s also worth noting that searching a stock image website for “countrycore” returns images relating to the aesthetic/country life, and none (admittedly, that I can see) relating to the term’s use as a musical genre - [8]. Finally, when I google the term ‘countrycore’, the majority of the search results I get are also referring to the aesthetic rather than the genre (I won’t link the search results page though as who knows what different results Google’s algorithm will show up at different times). A smart kitten (talk) 09:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I can’t see how much history the deleted page had, but if it had a non-trivial amount, I’d also support undeleting it prior to the retargeting, and also tagging any resulting redirect with {{R with history}}. A smart kitten (talk) 09:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Following @Shhhnotsoloud‘s comment below, if this page is retargeted to either Cottagecore or Cowpunk, I wouldn’t be opposed to adding a hatnote pointing to the other. A smart kitten (talk) 09:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Cowpunk where it is mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That mention was unsourced (and is now removed) --FMSky (talk) 11:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is not mentioned on country rap. This could work as a redirect to Matanza as it is mentioned there, but of course, if there are other artists described with this, it could be redirected to cowpunk with a small section describing this with the sources.

P.S. I did not recreate this redirect, somebody else did that, but thanks anyways for the notification. Moline1 (talk) 16:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If it does get redirected to Matanza or Cowpunk, then a notice informing people of the other page referred to by this term will be needed (e.g. Countrycore redirects here. For the aesthetic also referred to as countrycore, see cottagecore). Moline1 (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - recently-created neologism with no apparent agreed-upon definition of what it is. Wikipedia should not be in the business of inventing things. I didn't find any evidence that this is anything other than entirely made up, but if it was a notable topic then WP:REDLINK applies. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget - Kitten's suggestion to retarget to Cottagecore with a hatnote pointing to Cowpunk makes the most sense. Or vice versa, as proposed by Shhh and Moline. 53zodiac (talk) 21:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesnt make sense to have a redirect to copwpunk as its not related to it at all -FMSky (talk) 06:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kitten suggested redirecting it to cottagecore, not cowpunk. The hatnote could point to the other article if necessary 53zodiac (talk) 18:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 21:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NOTNEO. Like I said in the last discussion, unless it's a synonym or misspelling (it's not), it can't be redirected anywhere if there's not a reliable source that directly connects the two. Sergecross73 msg me 23:26, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sergecross73: WP:NOTNEO states that such articles are commonly deleted. I’d argue that the accepted standard (for want of a better term) for keeping a redirect is generally lower than that of an article — redirects are WP:CHEAP. I’d argue that Cottagecore as a redirect is fine to keep, as the term has got some usage in reliable sources that seems to connect it to Cottagecore (per my !vote), and it doesn’t seem like keeping the redirect would be harmful. I apologise if I’m misunderstanding anything here, as you’re a much more experienced editor than me! Best, ^user:A smart kitten_meow 21:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  What is the reliable source that makes the connection between the two though? Without a source, there can't be a mention in the article. And without a mention in the article, the redirect will go unexplained, and just end up deleted. Sergecross73 msg me 21:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Sergecross73 This Country Living article connects the two. ^user:A smart kitten_meow 21:29, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  If Country Living is a reliable source and someone can integrate it into cottage core, the. I'm not opposed to retargeting. Sergecross73 msg me 14:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 16:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Noting here for full transparency that I have boldly added (sometimes referred to as Countrycore or Farmcore) to the opening sentence of Cottagecore. Best, ^user:A smart kitten_meow 16:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Bloodbenders → Avatar: The Last Airbender  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unhelpful: no mention at target. (NPP action) Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, this (and Bloodbending) would link to World of Avatar: The Last Airbender, but that makes no mention of it either. It's first appearance in the show is in the third season, so Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 3) is probably the best place to link to. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Attha → Soul  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't see how this is related to soul, probably a misunderstanding for the Pāli word for soul, that is atta, without an h. (Pāli is used in Theravāda Buddhism.) Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If OP's assumption is correct, leaving the redirect is still probably better than deleting it for exactly that confusion. If there is something the word is more likely to be reference to, retarget there. Deleting the redirect has no benefit, the redirect existing has no additional cost. - Darker Dreams (talk) 16:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Dia De Los Muertos (2014 film) → The Book of Life (2014 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The film uses Día de los Muertos as a backdrop, but it isn't mentioned as the name of the film anywhere on the page or any other language versions of Wikipedia. I cannot find this film being called Dia De Los Muertos anywhere on the internet. ArcticSeeress (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Author of redirect, without comment, blanked this discussion notification, which by default is an agreeance to this request. This does not seem to be an alternate or non-english name of this film. Additionally, there is a non-notable 2014 short film with this name.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 13:24, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Baba Sathya Sai → Kodi Ramakrishna  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Please delete this. Redirect's name is not mentioned in target. Furthermore, I would say the director has died, and the film has been cancelled. 2607:FEA8:761F:4600:B5DB:F255:BD71:3EF2 (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• A former article here indicates (with a source) that principal photography was underway in 2016, and IMDb (not reliable, I know) suggests that this film was released in 2017. I don't see any evidence that the film was cancelled, but it is a bit difficult to search for. I'd suggest that the redirect be retargeted to Sathya Sai Baba (the film's subject) as a {{R from alternative name}} if the film was cancelled, or the article restored if it was released, but either way preserves the history. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (the film is now mentioned in the target page (I did it)). Not opposed to the retarget mentioned by Ivanvector but would prefer if thist film was mentioned there.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Winde (medical symptom) → Abdominal pain  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The closest connection I can fathom is "Winde" = obsolete spelling of "Wind"; "Wind" = abdominal gas; abdominal gas = abdominal gas = abdominal pain. Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like a very unlikely search term. No evidence "Winde" was ever actually used to refer to abdominal pain. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 15:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to flatulence, which is the target of intestinal gas. Pain can be caused by gas but gas is a symptom in and of itself. Wiktionary indicates that "winde" is an obsolete spelling of "wind", as in "passing wind", i.e. passing gas. It's also a word for "to wind" (as in winding something up, winding a crank, etc.) in several Germanic languages, but that's not a medical symptom. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Retarget to flatulence per Ivanvector. Duckmather (talk) 17:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:ImplausibleTypos → Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#R3. Implausible typos  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Odd CamelCase redirect created in 2017. Ironically enough, this is an implausible typo. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep as a redirect that clearly points towards WP:Implausible typo which ironically happens to be semi-humorous. I foresee myself sleeping more soundly at night knowing there is an implausible camelCase typo in WP namespace that targets the CSD#R3 criteria for ImplausibleTypos. Brings a smile to my face... 🙂😉 Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 04:36, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) Weak keep: it's not totally implausible, and this is projectspace anyways so relatively few will ever see it. Duckmather (talk) 04:38, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Since both keep !votes are "weak".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• It’s a weak keep from me as well, per Utopes and Duckmather. Best, ^user:A smart kitten_meow 19:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Multi-member university → List of universities in Vietnam#Multi-member universities  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This terminology is no longer mentioned at the target; all mentions of "multi-member university" were scrubbed and replaced with "university systems"... although even with that being said, "multi-member university" is still a vague search term and, to my understanding, not necessarily unique to universities in Vietnam. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Phoebe Russell → Phoebe Halliwell  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete; the name "Phoebe Russell" is not mentioned at the target article, nor in Charmed or in any of the related articles. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Judging by Special:Permalink/205747875 (the status of the redirect prior to redirection) and Special:Diff/205291309, it seems that Russell was the surname of the character in a past life. (See also Special:Diff/452115404, where the word “Russell” was last removed from the article, according to WikiBlame.) Best, ^user:A smart kitten_meow 19:27, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]