User:Awesome Aasim/rfd rewrite

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Copied from WP:RFD with few changes

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see Wikipedia:Deletion venues. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment.
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion
XFD backlog
V Apr May Jun Jul Total
CfD 0 0 4 10 14
TfD 0 0 0 2 2
MfD 0 0 0 2 2
FfD 0 0 0 11 11
RfD 0 0 4 24 28
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.

  • If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
  • If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
  • If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
  • Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)

Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:

The guiding principles of RfD

Shortcut
  • The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
  • Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
  • If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
  • Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
  • RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
  • Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
  • In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.

When should we delete a redirect?


Shortcut

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes and Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving over a redirect

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

  • a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
  • if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").

Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.

Reasons for deleting

Shortcuts
See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):

  1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
  2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
  3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
  4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
  5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
  6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, are an exception to this rule. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
  7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
  8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
  9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
  10. Shortcut
    If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.

Reasons for not deleting

Shortcuts

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

  1. They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
  2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
  3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
  4. Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
  5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
  6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.

Neutrality of redirects

Shortcut

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

  1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
  2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
  3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).

How to list a redirect for discussion

Shortcut
STEP I.
Tag the redirect(s).

  Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page.

  • Please do not mark the edit as minor (m).
  • Please include in the edit summary the phrase:
    Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]].
  • Save the page ("Publish changes").
  • If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page.
  • If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination.
  • If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated.
STEP II.
List the entry on RfD.

 Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.

  • Enter this text below the date heading:
{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~
  • For this template:
    • Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=.
    • Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=).
  • Please use an edit summary such as:
    Nominating [[RedirectName]]
    (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating).
  • To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects:
{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}}
{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}
{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~
  • If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.
Notify users.

  It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate.

To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template

{{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~

may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as:
Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]

Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

  • Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.

Current list

July 19

Mario Circuit

Not mentioned in the target. Mia Mahey (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep as track from game. mwwv converse∫edits 03:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
    The reason it was reverted into a redirect is because it was completely unsourced. It should only return to being an article if reliable sources relating to it show that it is noteworthy enough to include on Wikipedia. SleepDeprivedGinger (talk) 11:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Revert to an article without prejudice to AfD per WP:BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 12:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or restore article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:07, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Bolsover (borough)

Delete, neither the current non-metropolitan district at Bolsover District nor the previous district Bolsover Urban District hold/have held borough status. Yes Google searches in quotes for "Bolsover Borough Council" will return results but the same is the case for "Braintree Borough Council" and "Harlow Borough Council". This is different to Chesterfield (borough) and Chesterfield Borough Council that go to Borough of Chesterfield that does have borough status along with the previous district Municipal Borough of Chesterfield. Its normal for districts that have borough status to have redirects from "Foo (district)" but not redirects for "Foo (borough)" when the district doesn't have borough status. Yes there are links to the redirect but they can be changed to the correct target and it appears to only have been at this title for a few weeks in 2004 when it was corrected and moved. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Simply the result of an error I made briefly over a little over 20 years ago. Seems entirely reasonable to delete. Morwen (talk) 00:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. Given the internet hits for "Bolover borough" and "Borough of Bolsover" this is a common enough error to merit a {{R from incorrect name}} redirect. See e.g page 11 of this PDF where the local Conservative Party calls it "Borough of Bolsover". We educate people making this sort of mistake by taking them to the content they are looking for that explains the correct situation rather than making them jump through hoops to find it. Thryduulf (talk) 08:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep as an attested error that someone might search. The existence of the redirect will correct them effectively enough. Fieari (talk) 00:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Guillermo Vilas: Settling the Score

Not sure what to do about this one. The subject exists (per third party searches) and is linked at List of Netflix original films (2020) in the list of film released that year. But ... the fact that this title is a redirect and not an article seems to validate WP:REDYES deletion. However, the subject of this redirect is mentioned twice in the biographical article about its subject, Guillermo Vilas: Once in the last paragraph of the article's top section, and once in the last paragraph of Guillermo Vilas#ATP ranking No. 1 controversy. I am not sure if either of these targets are viable retargeting options for this redirect, or if the redirect should be deleted to promote the creation of an article (though my preference here is deletion.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Bigflo & Oli: Hip Hop Frenzy

Not sure what to do about this one. The subject exists (per third party searches) and is linked at List of Netflix original films (2020) in the list of film released that year. But ... the fact that this title is a redirect and not an article seems to validate WP:REDYES deletion. In addition, the article for the group mentioned in the title of his redirect, Bigflo & Oli, seems to make no mention or reference of the subject of this redirect anywhere in that article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Running with Sherman (film)

Yet another story which Netflix bought the rights in 2019 to create a film, but nothing came out of it since. The base title Running with Sherman is a redirect that targets Christopher McDougall#Works (after I retargeted it last month), the article about the author of the "Running with Sherman" story, but that article contains no information about a film adaptation of the "Running with Sherman" story. Steel1943 (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Lady Business (film)

Seems this was a story which Netflix bought the rights in 2019 with the intent to make a film, but it does not seem as though the film ever went into production. Also, it seems the film was to star Brie Larson; online searches for the "Lady Business" turn up nothing at the present time 5 years later ... well, while also distinguishing that the "Lady Business" film is a subject separate from Unicorn Store. Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

VSTA

I have just created VSTA (disambiguation), and while I would grant that the current redirect target is the most popular target directly using this acronym, I lean towards thinking that there is no primary target, and the disambiguation should be moved over the redirect. BD2412 T 19:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

AlphaDeltaNationalFraternity

Words run together unlikely mistype. Naraht (talk) 19:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Return to the Palace

Not mentioned at the target page. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 18:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Pokemon generations 5

implausible pluralization? if kept, i'll be retargeting to the gen 5 games regardless of result cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Misty Williams

same rationale as below, different character, wrong surname (apparently, results seem torn between williams and waterflower) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Brock Harrison

i do not want to elaborate on how many layers of obscure fanon this is, so i hope the explanation can begin and end at "that's fanmade" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment there's apparently an old interview featuring Brock's VA where he mentions this information, but it seems pretty trivial regardless. Linking the archived link of the interview that I could find, but admittedly I'm not sure if this would sway anything either way. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

PKMN R

what about pokémon ruby? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Cianwood Island

the island does not have a proper name. it's just "cianwood city" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Cianwood City (Cianwood Island)

are there any cianwood cities this could be mistaken for? more importantly, the island it's in isn't actually known as "cianwood island" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

PKMN SS

has it been agreed that sword and shield will always be abbreviated as "swsh", or could this be dabified? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete. For some reason, this abbreviation makes me think of the ship in Red, Blue, and Yellow (probably because of the use of "SS"). Probably best to just delete this thing. Steel1943 (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

HeartSilver and GoldSoul

that's actually pretty funny and almost a plausible mistake, but they're not even consistently named. one is mind thing/metal and the other is metal/mind thing. more than anything, i vote to delete this as aesthetically painful cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Pokémon DuskGold and DawnSilver

i wanted to argue that they were development names, fan speculation, or something, but that doesn't seem to be the case. best case scenario, they were the names of rom hacks or bootlegs, but i only found deviantart ocs cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

the names aren't even consistent with each other, why cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Galar

there's apparently at 2 more things with this name, but i'm mostly concerned about fjalar and galar, the smartness juice guys from norse mythology. is this worth a dab or hatnote, or is this specific galar a primary as h*ck topic? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Create disambiguation page there are several Galars that are pretty notable subjects (The main location of a high selling videogame, a figure in Norse mythology, a town in Spain, a village in Wales, and apparently a redirect at Bahnar language) All of these are pretty important subjects, and I can't see which one would be the primary topic. I feel a DAB page would very much be helpful here given the number of things that have the name Galar. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

200 (song)

The song is actually not a primary topic. So, I suggest a retarget to 200 (disambiguation) since I added 2 songs to this disambiguation. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 14:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

M-Block

'm (or 'm block) is a glitch pokémon that shares missingno's "sprite", index number, and some functions, but is otherwise a different glitch. it's not mentioned in the article aside from an offhanded mention in the translation for source 1 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep. AFAIK we don't discuss the 'M glitch in any other capacity, the most common method of finding MissingNo will also turn up 'M, and it doesn't just copy SOME functions, but PRACTICALLY ALL functions. For our intents and purposes, 'M and MissingNo. are the same thing and should be treated accordingly by redirects. Leave further details to Glitch City Labs and Bulbapedia. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
for pedantries that would border on fancruft if there weren't actually a couple of sources behind them...
missingno (the form everyone recognizes, that is) can be obtained via the old man and mew glitches and the time capsule exploit with certain names, special stats, and gen 2 pokémon respectively, adds 128 items to the item in the 6rd slot of the player's bag, and corrupts hall of fame data
'm (specifically 00, as fe and ff are just hybrids) can only be obtained via the old man glitch and shares missingno's sprite, item cloning, and hall of fame corruption as a result of sharing its index number, but has (slightly) different data, such as moves and cries, can evolve into clefairy or kangaskhan, and lets you catch phantom ditto. according to some old stuff i found, it can also apparently spontaneously turn into a rhydon if you have another 'm in your party
from a quick-ish look, those two sources mention 'm and its differences compared to missingno in some level of detail, an archive of the latter currently being source 9 in missingno's article, so if a mention could be added or discussed, i wouldn't be opposed to it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep per Lunamann.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on adding a mention at the target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

i was going to suggest it in the talk page right after this closed, guess i'll have to wait another week cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Pokémon incident

extremely vague. requires that "pokémon" and "incident" be defined in a way that somehow narrows it down to only this particular episode of the anime generation that also featured jynx and hypno, while excluding every other controversy the franchise has seen cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

should mention that i would favor retargeting it to an article or section of an article detailing most controversies, no such thing exists (yet). the closest i found was pokémon episodes removed from rotation, but even then, that's only for the anime cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete as far too vague. When seeing the title I assumed it was some sort of (political) scandal or other real-world incident related to Pokémon in some way. A politician making a gaffe and exposing their ignorance while trying to appear to be a "man of the people" or something like that would have been my first guess. Thryduulf (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
    isn't that the plot of swsh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
    I wouldn't have a clue! I've never watched, read or played Pokémon. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep - contrary to the above (and a whiny fan base) this is by far the most consequential incident related to the series. This actually ahead real world implications, that reliable sources wrote articles about. Sergecross73 msg me 23:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep as WP:PTOPIC. This incident was/is overwhelmingly more impactful than any other. Fieari (talk) 00:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Biographies of living persons

This should be a CNR to WP:BLP. All of the 304 links to this redirect are in reference to the Wikipedia policy, rather than the Biography article. It seems unlikely that anyone searching for this would be looking for the encyclopedic article, especially considering the term is never mentioned. It was retarted to Biography from a CNR in 2009. C F A 💬 18:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Comment: I suppose this could also be retargeted to an encyclopedia article about Wikipedia, like Wikipedia#Policies_and_content, Vandalism on Wikipedia, or List of Wikipedia controversies (Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident), though a project redirect would make the most sense in my eyes. C F A 💬 18:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Retarget (or add encyclopaedic content) This is a very high profile policy that does get referenced frequently off-site so I'm surprised we don't have some encyclopaedic content about it that could host a hatnote to the policy, although finding sources will be tricky due to the large number of Wikipedia mirrors and many other sites that have policies/guidelines with the same title. If we don't have encyclopaedic content then a cross-namespace redirect is the way to go - this is something that needs to be very easy to find, particularly by prospective editors and article subjects who shouldn't have to learn about namespaces first. Thryduulf (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
    I was wondering if there would be enough coverage to write a separate article on the policy. I found it surprising that even the Policies and content section in the main Wikipedia article only briefly mentioned the policy (in reference to the Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident). If someone is willing to do that and they can find enough coverage, then that (with a hatnote) would be my preferred outcome over retargeting. C F A 💬 21:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Its not really a Wikipedia specific term but all Google results are for the policy. Maybe it should be kept as with a link on the DAB page to the BLP policy as well as the current MOS page. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
    That's what I was considering doing before listing it here, but I decided against it. Do you really think anyone typing "Biographies of living persons" into the search bar is looking for Biography? It is obviously directly referencing the policy and the term isn't even mentioned in the article. C F A 💬 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete promotes incorrect linkage, and making a CNR would not be for readership content. -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. There's no way BLP isn't notable and we should really have some encyclopedic content about it. Nickps (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Skeltal

that's the "doot" meme. doesn't seem like a plausible misspelling of "skeletal" otherwise, as e is just close enough to t where it'd be hard to forget to type one letter cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep: per WP:CHEAP. C F A 💬 19:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
    Skeltal is a variant name of a popular internet meme [1]. Our article on skeleton lack information about this meme, neither do any other article. The intro of WP:REDIRECT, a guideline says Redirects are used to help people arrive more quickly at the page they want to read. A generic article about skeletons are not what readers would want to see when they are searching about a meme. Ca talk to me! 05:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
    It seems pretty obscure. I doubt there's enough coverage to write an article on it, but I suppose someone could try. I imagine most people searching "Skeltal" on Wikipedia are looking for "Skeletal," which is also a redirect to Skeleton. C F A 💬 15:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

One PIece

that's an uppercase i cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Delete Implausible misspelling. Our search function automatically handles different capitalizations. I tend to agree that effort of listing redirects with minor errors can be used elsewhere, but we might as well delete them as they are listed to reduce maintance work for useless redirects. Ca talk to me! 05:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  • WEak keep per sticky shift key typo error, a very plausible sort of error you see in online forums all the time. -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 08:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Suiattle tribe

Delete. No links to this redirect, and I can't see anything ever linking to this. Given that "Suiattle" has almost no literature (independent from the Sauk-Suiattle or Sauk themselves), and as far as I am aware, they weren't a tribe, but just a term that referred to people who would traditionally go to the Suiattle River during the summer gathering season in pre-colonial times, I can't forsee this ever being necessary as a redirect. PersusjCP (talk) 01:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep - The primary purpose of a redirect is not to catch links within wikipedia, but to assist users searching for the topic. The target article, in the lead, says that Sauk-Suiattle is a tribe, which makes it plausible enough that someone would search for either "Sauk tribe" or "Suiattle tribe" regardless of the technical accuracy of those search terms. A redirect is not an endorsement of fact or accuracy, just a search aid. Fieari (talk) 03:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    That makes sense, thank you for explaining! PersusjCP (talk) 20:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep per Fieari. Thryduulf (talk) 09:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep: reasonable search term. No reason to delete. C F A 💬 14:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

July 18

Heartless Angel

a recurring attack for sephiroth in a lot of his appearances since his debut... but also for kefka. if both appear in a playable or boss form in any given game, heartless angel tends to go to whoever pops up first, which is usually kefka. if you want to be technical, sephiroth gets it more often overall because he gets more appearances, but results seem to associate it equally with both (give or take sephiroth being mentioned more often overall). even then, heartless angel isn't mentioned in either of their articles. if not deleted, i don't know if it should be kept there or retargeted to kefka, to final fantasy#gameplay, or to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, because it'd be hard to cram an unsourced mention (or worse, a mention with a guide as the source) into those otherwise good or featured articles cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Comment - Soooo... the move gets a "kind of" mention in Kefka's article, as "Fallen Angel", although the actual Woolsey translation rendered it in game as "Fallen One" on the SNES (as can be confirmed by looking up a playthrough on youtube). This is the move that got commentary from a reliable source, and was worth the mention in the article. Now, I believe you're probably right that it's been updated in newer versions/releases of the game to Heartless Angel, as the Final Fantasy fandom wiki uses that term, but it doesn't seem to have garnered any commentary in reliable sources. Google, on the other hand, shows overwhelming preference to linking the term with Sephiroth instead of Kefka, likely due to the relative popularity of FFVII over FFVI... except that most if not all of these hits I'm finding are not from WP:RS. Which leaves us in the awkward position where there's clear analysis that would be interesting to discuss... that we can't use because none of it has gone through editorial publishing processes. I can't decide whether that means we should delete the redirect because we don't really have information on exactly it under that name, redirect to Kefka because the thing this redirect refers to IS directly named and described there... except under a different name (which is even incorrect, despite being published in a WP:RS!), or to keep the redirect because usage online clearly prefers Sephiroth as the WP:PTOPIC even though we don't and probably can't mention it there! Fieari (talk) 02:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    The fact that the Kefka article mentioned "Fallen Angel" as the name of the move bothered me enough that I added an endnote with the correction, and a mention to the renaming of it to Heartless Angel. Not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but surely the primary source material can be used just for a correction of this sort. Fieari (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    at this point, i'd say nuke it until a reliable source decides to cover the attack (and actually get the name right)
    also yeah, i did say results preferred sephiroth, because ff7 is the only final fantasy game people can remember the existence of for more than 15 seconds. coverage of final fantasy elements kind of sucks tbh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Magical underwear

I belive this redirect should be deleated. This redirect is inappropriate and offensive, often leading to confusion. In addition please see Magic underwear. The term 'magical underwear' is frequently used as an insult rather than in an academic or educational context. In addition the originial creater of the redirect was banned for valdisimilm, see his user page [2]. LuxembourgLover (talk) 23:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep - Redirects are allowed to violate WP:NPOV, and even be offensive, as they are generally not user visible. I appreciate your concern, as no one likes things that are special to them insulted... I get it. But the term is used out there in the wild often enough that someone wanting to learn more about it, even in a respectful way, may not have any other knowledge of how to find it except this insult that gets used a lot... and towards that end the redirect may end up doing a lot more good than harm to you anyway. Fieari (talk) 23:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep, it is definitely a term that people use to refer to it, probably even moreso than "temple garment." Google trends shows that "magic underwear" or "mormon magic underwear" is more popular of a search term than "temple garment"[3] so it checks out. The Ngram viewer shows that "temple garment" is winning, but that makes sense as it is the more academic term, as you said. PersusjCP (talk) 02:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment The redirect Magic underwear was tagged, but never added to the nomination. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep these are both well-attested and unambiguous. Per WP:RNEUTRAL redirects from established non-neutral search terms to neutrally written articles are allowed and often a good thing - if someone doesn't know or doesn't remember the proper name we want to make it easy for them to find the content that tells them about it. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Carlinal/Favorite quality articles

Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Kit 2

deletion, due to no article linking to this redirect. D4n2016 (talk) 21:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Keep - Articles linking to redirects is not the primary purpose of redirects-- the primary purpose is to help readers find the information they are looking for, such as by typing it into the search bar. If someone is looking for information on the "Kit 2", this article has that information. Fieari (talk) 23:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment - BGM-109 Tomahawk has been recently moved to Tomahawk (missile family) so we should update to avoid the double-redirect. ⇒SWATJester Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat! 01:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    Ah, good catch! I should have noticed that. Yeah, update it to avoid the double redirect. Fieari (talk) 02:42, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    I have now fixed the double redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Stun ray

The subject of the redirect is not mentioned in the target article, leaving it unclear what subject this redirect is meant to define. From a preliminary search of Wikipedia, it seems this redirect is mentioned nowhere. Steel1943 (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Weak retarget to stun gun, which mentions the current target. Hesitant because 'stun weapons' are not really described at that target. Might be better to return this to red for now. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment - I'm legitimately befuddled that this isn't mentioned and discussed in detail at the target article, given how much a staple it is in sci-fi. Making a character sleep without actually hurting them is just such a USEFUL thing for a writer to be able to do, that even in non-scifi works you get things like that one punch that harmlessly KOs you, or chloroform, or a sleeping drug or whatever. In sci-fi, they definitely use stun guns all the time, from Star Wars to Star Trek and beyond. It's a trope for a reason. Normally, when I feel like article creation should be encouraged I !vote delete to redlink it, but here, I don't think it deserves its own article at all... I just think it should be included in this one. Err... not that I'm volunteering to write it though. Not sure what to do in this situation. Fieari (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Raygun - it's a scifi weapon that shoots rays, that mentions stunning: A wide range of non-lethal functions as determined by the requirements of the story: for instance, they may stun, paralyze or knock down a target, much like modern electroshock weapons.. BugGhost🦗👻 12:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Jerry Temporary

a misremembering of the song's name that became a siivagunner meme. not mentioned in the target or notable on its own, BUT it might actually be a plausible search, as it's ironically become a common misremembering later on (or siiva is just that influential on public musical knowledge, it's hard to tell). opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep - I don't know who siivagunner is but googling the phrase "Jerry Temporary" comes up with lots of Temporary Secretary hits. Redirects are cheap, if it helps someone get to the right article then it's worth keeping (and it get a lot more hits than most things on RfD). BugGhost🦗👻 13:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

VF2

There is also Vanadium(II) fluoride and the vf2 algorithm from Graph_isomorphism#Recognition_of_graph_isomorphism. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguate per 1234. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 11:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguate. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Andy youre a star

This redirect is misspelled, it should be "Andy, You're a Star". Correct spelling already exists. Apollogetticax|talk 08:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Weak keep, seems harmless. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Distribution Center Management System

Redirect should replace the target article so it uses title-case spelling. Article is about a specific proprietary system, not the general concept; the sentence-case spelling can redirect to Warehouse management system, which is the general concept. Tule-hog (talk) 06:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Bigrigs

i think it should be retargeted, but should it be to semi-trailer truck, or to big rig (disambiguation)? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Semi-trailer truck: Since this is the primary topic, it would serve readers best to redirect here. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:36, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment in my searches, the primary topic is actually Big Rigs, an Australian magazine that at first glance might be notable (I've not looked deeper than that) but which doesn't have an article. The semi-truck page does have a hatnote to the dab page, which lists the video game prominently however that is two clicks rather than none. Thryduulf (talk) 02:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment on a related note, I've just created Bigrig as a redirect to Bigrigg (a village in the UK) and added a hatnote to the truck and dab page, but I debated with myself which target is best so feel free to discuss if you think I made the wrong choice. Thryduulf (talk) 02:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  • REtarget "bigrigs" and "bigrig" to Semi-trailer truck, as the primary topic. In North America, no Australian magazine would ever come up, since the truck is what is meant -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 08:45, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
    Nothing about Wikipedia or "Bigrigs" is inherently North American. Thryduulf (talk) 11:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Semi-trailer truck solely due to the fact that Big rig and Big rigs target Semi-trailer truck and making the connections a best effort to reduce astonishment upon arriving at any specific target. (If need be though, I am weak disambiguate upon reading the regional discrepancies of English with the terms.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:24, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Semi-trailer truck as WP:PTOPIC. It's what the term actually means, after all, even in the current target. I don't believe the Australian Magazine is even close in terms of being searched for, no dab is needed here. Not even sure a hatnote would be warranted, but I wouldn't object to one outright. Fieari (talk) 23:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Retarget Bigrigs to semi-trailer truck as per above. Keep Bigrig going to Bigrigg. BugGhost🦗👻 13:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros. 6

Not mentioned in the target. No information about a video game named Super Smash Bros. 6 exists in the target article or in Super Smash Bros. Mia Mahey (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

delete as wrong. ultimate is the 5st installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Cogsan see below. Some call it the sixth. Not arguing that's correct, but it's plausible at least. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
that's if you ignore the fact that smash for 3ds and that other console are both commonly referred to as "sm4sh", and clumped together as two different flavors of the same installment by pretty much everyone less pedantic than me. ironically, nintendo considers them to be separate, but even the article reduces that to note c, accompanied by "but who cares about those guys, most sources say they're both smash 4" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
None of that changes that its a plausible search term, with sourcing and notes to clear up confusion. Again, I'm not saying its the sixth title. I'm not arguing anyone should think that. I'm saying its a plausible redirect because some people think that, and some sources outline it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep - it is the sixth entry in the Smash Bros if you consider the 3DS and Wii versions separate games, which some developers/sources do. Sergecross73 msg me 23:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
    The target does not state that it is the sixth entry in the series instead of the fifth. This redirect will be misleading when a sixth Super Smash Bros. game is released. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
    A reliably sourced mention of how some consider it the sixth entry could be very easily implemented. Additionally, there's no need to right now future-proof the article for a future game that hasn't even been announced to exist yet. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
    People searching for Super Smash Bros. 6 are most likely looking for information on a successor of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. No information on such game exists in the target article, or for that matter, anywhere on Wikipedia, so the redirect is harmful and should be deleted per WP:COSTLY. Mia Mahey (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    I strongly disagree with that notion. Why would people be searching for an unannounced game that currently isn't know to exist with this search term? And if someone was knowledgeable enough to use a relatively rare search term like "Smash Bros 6" in a search bar, they'd be knowledgeable enough to understand what Smash Bros Ultimate is. So your confusion scenario feels rather far fetched to me, I don't know what sort of person this would apply to. Doubly so since I've maintained the Ultimate page since its inception and thus has not been a common issue. Sergecross73 msg me 02:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    Usually only major video games in a series are numbered, and Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is only the fifth major Super Smash Bros. game. If Super Smash Bros. 6 redirects to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, on the basis of the 3DS and Wii U releases being treated as separate games, I think we should probably also have Mario Kart 9 redirect to Mario Kart 8#Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which we don't and we shouldn't. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    by that logic, which one would be 5 anyway? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    This is irrelevant. There's never been any discussion or consensus that Mario Kart is handling it correctly either, so it's no standard to aspire to. It's just an WP:OSE-violating comparison. Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete. Super Smash Bros for 3DS and Super Smash Bros for Wii U are both Smash 4, and neither are Smash 5. They did release on separate days, with Wii U being released after 3DS, but they were released literally two months apart, were clearly developed together, and they have several methods of transferring data between the two platforms; it's highly probable that they only released separately due to delays. They also share a Wikipedia page, shared advertising space, pretty much everywhere you go they're talked about as one unit instead of two separate games-- much like, for example, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Blue Rescue Team and Red Rescue Team, another instance of one game with two names on two different Nintendo consoles with different capabilities. (If you throw out the 'two different consoles' thing, pretty much any first-of-the-gen Pokemon game in the history of ever, from Pokemon Red and Blue all the way to Pokémon Scarlet and Violet are examples of this in action. (Like, what, are you saying that Pokémon Emerald is Pokemon 13 or something???)
    Because of this, Smash Ultimate is clearly Smash 5, and thus, Smash 6 would logically be the next entry of the series after Smash Ultimate, a game that does not exist. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    no, let's make it worse
    red + green (jp) > blue (jp) > stadium (jp) > yellow > red + blue (not jp) > hey you, pikachu > tcg (game boy) > snap > pinball > "stadium" (actually stadium 2) > gold + silver > dance! pikachu > puzzle challenge > puzzle league > "stadium 2" (actually stadium gold and silver) > crystal > pikachu's great surfing adventure > tcg 2 > crayon kids > party mini > zany cards > pinball mini > puzzle collection > tetris > breeder mini (wait what) > puzzle collection vol. 2 > race mini > catch the numbers > pichu bros. mini > togepi's great adventure > ruby + sapphire > box r&s > channel > pinball r&s > channel > pinball r&s > some hiragana and katakana education game > colosseum > firered + leafgreen > pico for everyone > emerald
    thus, emerald is the 46nd installment in the pokémon franchise, or the 14st mainline installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
    Is that jan Misali reference I'm seeing? :D Ca talk to me! 01:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
    a what cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
    I'm getting into WP:NOTFORUM territory, but they published a video exploring a similar question but for Super Mario mainline series. Ca talk to me! 06:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
    oh, that one. my dumb brain forgot it wasn't from summoning salt. whoops cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
    Again, you're both arguing what's "correct" instead of arguing what's plausible. Whether it's the correct numbering is irrelevant. Some people (not me) believe it to be true, and the alternative is a game that doesn't even exist. We don't need to future proof for scenarios that may not ever even happen. It can be easily and quickly fixed as things potentially change someday. Sergecross73 msg me 00:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate - only mention of "Smash Bros. 6" on Wikipedia is from that article, talking about a Bandai Namco recruitment page stating: The recruitment page consisted of a listing for programmers for "Smash Bros. 6", which was expected to be released in 2015 for both the Wii U and Nintendo 3DS", which is likely why the redirect exists in the first place. It being mentioned there is just a happy coincidence though - the main reason why I am saying it should go to Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate rather than Super Smash Bros. Ultimate directly is because the lengthy discussions above shows that there is ambiguity that SB6 would refer to Ultimate or some future/non-existent game, and Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is directly above a "Future" section, so this redirect would cover both bases. As an aside, I don't think the above discussions need to be continued - regardless of anyone's views, I think the outcome is obvious that there's no clear primary topic - we now just need to find the best way of disambiguating. BugGhost🪲👻 08:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

while this discussion goes nowhere, i should note ssb6 and ssb 6 also exist, and could be added here cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with the other two redirects as suggested above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  • Delete the SSB redirects, Keep "Super Smash Bros. 6". From the above discussion, it appears that "Smash Bros. 6" has been used to refer to "Ultimate", and it's a plausible search term. The fact that it's wrong shouldn't be relevant - otherwise, we'd need to delete Me109. Tevildo (talk) 17:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Super Smash Bros. without a section redirect. Quite frankly, anything after the "4" designation is up for debate since some people consider the Wii U and 3DS versions "4" collectively, but others consider them "4" and "5" collectively. Let the readers try to figure out what the heck they are trying to find if searching these terms because we are not mind readers. Steel1943 (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
    Would also support this BugGhost🦗👻 08:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

redirects to unmanned combat aerial vehicle

These need retargetting, as these are not specific to UCAV. Military drones can be unarmed, such as the Global Hawk, and most target drones (Q-planes) like the QF-4 (retired fighter converted to target drone). Armed drones are not restricted to UCAVs, such as sea drones operated by Ukraine that have sunk many Russian ships. On the Ukrainian battlefield, armed and unarmed land drones (unmanned ground vehicle -- UGV) also are being used, as are armed and unarmed aerial drones (UAV - unmanned aerial vehicle). Both the US and China have demonstrated drone tanks and robot dogs with machine guns. Police have tracked ground drones armed with shotguns, so not just militaries have armed drones. UXOD and landmine clearing also use military ground drones.

-- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 13:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

  • Upon further thought, I believe the best course of action for the others would be to make Military drone a disambiguation page and retarget the rest to it. - ZLEA T\C 17:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:22, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Older

Old business

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Awesome_Aasim/rfd_rewrite&oldid=1201929683"