Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 26

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was no consensus – default to retarget to, erm, ah, Teleportation. (non-admin closure) J947 † ^edits 01:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Instantaneous travel between any two points in the universe → Hyperspace  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target article may not be the subject that comes to mind when searching this term; the reason why the current redirect targets where it does seems to be related to traveling through the target subject. However, with the way the redirect is worded, the redirect could refer to other subjects, such as Teleportation. May be best to delete this redirect to allow search results to take priority. Steel1943 (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 22:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The history behind this redirect is a bit interesting. It was created in September 2016 as a redirect to Jump drive, until that article was deleted and turned into a redirect to USB flash drive in September 2019 (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jump drive). A bot quickly fixed the double redirect, turning this into a redirect directly to USB flash drive. A couple of weeks later in October 2019 someone noticed that redirecting "Instantaneous travel between any two points in the universe" to USB flash drive was obviously nonsensical and changed the redirect target to Hyperspace, which I suppose was the closest to jump drive that they could find an article for. TompaDompa (talk) 00:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget somewhere as this is clearly a plausible search term. Faster-than-light is my first thought for the target although there might be something better. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Space travel in science fiction. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 15:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment: For the above, it seems this redirect could have multiple potential targets it could be referring to, and is thus ambiguous. However, this redirect is rather burdensome in its length to type, meaning both the likelihood of someone typing this exact phrase and its usefulness as any sort of disambiguation are rather questionable. Seems the best solution here would truly be deletion to allow search results. Steel1943 (talk) 20:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason it exists in the first place is that someone linked the phrase instantaneous travel between any two points in the universe at the The Dosadi Experiment article back in 2016 and created a redirect rather than WP:PIPING. TompaDompa (talk) 23:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there some reason this shouldn't go to teleportation? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:36, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are multiple target suggestions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:20, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Space travel in science fiction (1st choice) or Teleportation (2nd choice) or (Weak) Delete - My rationale for deletion is that this is an implausibly long search term. If someone is typing something that long into the wikipedia search box, it's incredibly unlikely they'll use this exact phrasing... it's equally likely they'd search "Instant travel between different places in the galaxy" which semantically means basically the same thing, but wouldn't hit this redirect. It might be better to just get rid of the redirect and let the wikipedia search engine take up the slack. That said, this is a weak delete !vote, because redirects are WP:CHEAP, and it isn't entirely implausible for someone to search for this. I think mention of "universe" makes the space travel in scifi link more useful, but I can also see arguments for teleportation... although teleportation is usually written about in a more "local" sense, as in teleporting to the other side of the wall, or teleporting across the planet, or teleporting from orbit to the surface. When teleporting further than that, ironically, "jump drive" is actually the more commonly used term! Which brings us back to the space travel in scifi article. So that's my preference. Fieari (talk) 06:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If retargeting, teleportation would probably be the best target or space travel in science fiction next best, but there are sufficiently many possible targets and it's a sufficiently implausible as a search term that I don't see any real benefit in keeping it at all. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 keep. Creator blocked, everyone else opining to keep. (non-admin closure) J947 † ^edits 00:59, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Only Up → Meta Runner  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Only Up" can refer to other things than just Meta Runner. I don't know why this is redirected here since this has nothing to do with meta runner. Jeffhardyfan08 (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (or dab'ify) - The reason for the redirect is that "Only Up" is the name of the opening theme to the 2nd season of this show. This information is located in the infobox on the right. What else did you have in mind that "Only Up" would refer to? If there's more than one thing, a disambiguation page could be created and used instead, but I honestly can't think of anything else. If there isn't anything else, this is an unambiguous redirect that would be useful for anyone searching for information about the song... that information being, "it is the opening theme to the 2nd season of Meta Runner". Fieari (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Nominator clearly failed to do a proper WP:BEFORE, since "Only Up" is the title of one of the show's opening themes, as explained above by Fieari. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 keep. Nominator blocked, everyone else opining to keep. (non-admin closure) J947 † ^edits 01:00, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Bot-Boys → Meta Runner#Minor Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Bot-Boy → Meta Runner#Minor Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Although a minor character in the series, Bot Boy refers to more than a minor character in Meta Runner. Jeffhardyfan08 (talk) 21:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Does it? What else does it refer to? If there's more than one thing, make a disambiguation page. If not, then this is a useful redirect. Fieari (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. Useful and unambiguous. No need for deletion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• NDSAP → Nazi Party  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I believe that this should go to National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy – Government of India, considering that NSDAP is the correct initialism for the Nazi party, not NDSAP, which is a misspelling. Therefore I believe National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy – Government of India should be the primary topic, not a misspelling of NSDAP. --Matr1x-101${\displaystyle _{when-replying}^{Ping-me}}$ {_{user page @ commons} - ^talk - _contribs} 21:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as is - The misspelling is much more likely to occur than a call to one country's obscure policy. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy – Government of India National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy (assuming that is the only subject on Wikipedia that could be referred to as "NDSAP".) If the acronym is wrong and represents something else, it should target the subject representing the acronym instead. However, it could still be possibly that it's a mistype, so the new target should be hatnoted to refer readers to the current target in case of confusion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Fixed article name. Steel1943 (talk) 02:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy – Government of India National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy - I was about to agree with Matr1x-101, that a redirect from typo/misspelling is a thousand times more likely to be useful than a link to an obscure policy... but then I reconsidered that if someone was sent an email telling them they needed to get into compliance with the NDSAP then trying to look up what the heck that is on wikipedia is a very likely response. BUT! Because the typo is far more likely a search term, I do think it's imperative for a hatnote to be used at the target. Fieari (talk) 07:15, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Fieari: Umm ... per what I read on your comment, do you mean "keep", or do you mean that you agree with Beyond My Ken? Something in your comment doesn't read right. Steel1943 (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2023 (UTC) Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I apologize if I was unclear, I was attempting to explain my thought process and how I arrived at my conclusion. In summary, no I don't mean keep, I mean that I agree with you. Retarget to the one thing that matches this initialism directly, and add a hatnote at that article. Fieari (talk) 23:46, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget with hatnote at National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy. StAnselm (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget with hatnote to National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy seems the best solution. Guessworking that this term refers to the Nazis approximately 60% of the time, possibly more. With that figure, a retarget is better because correct targets should be prioritised over incorrect targets, and a hatnote is much cheaper on that article than at the current target. This redirect is used enough to warrant a hatnote, in my opinion. We do not seem to have any coverage on the U.S. Navy Drug Safety Action Program, which dominates book (<- edit) search results. See also Talk:NASDAP. J947 † ^edits 23:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  In fact the Navy Drug Safety Action Program is now "NADSAP", the Navy Alcohol and Drug Safety Action Program. StAnselm (talk) 01:23, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Haha, I did see that, but thought it was abbreviated NASDAP rather than NADSAP – hence the link to Talk:NASDAP. I guess that's a point in favour of the misspelling! J947 † ^edits 01:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Of course - we should probably have something like {{Redirect-distinguish-text|NDSAP|the NSDAP, the politicial party that existed in Germany from 1920 to 1945.}} at the top of the article --Matr1x-101${\displaystyle _{when-replying}^{Ping-me}}$ {_{user page @ commons} - ^talk - _contribs} 18:09, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 01:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per WP:RDAB due to the lack of space between the title and the disambiguator. The properly-spaced variant, Parineeta (film), exists and is a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per K4. J947 † ^edits 04:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it was only at this title for less than a month in 2005. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:28, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and WP:RDAB. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Amazon OS → Fire OS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Amazon OS is not just for FireOS, there is firestick OS, and many others. Jeffhardyfan08 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From Amazon's website:

"Fire OS is the operating system that runs Amazon's Fire TV and tablets."

Fire OS is an operating system used by various Amazon products (Firestick), so there appears to be only one clear target. The redirect to me is valid, since Apple OS disambiguates to List of Apple operating systems. Since this is the only generally notable operating system made by Amazon and no article exists cataloguing any other potential Amazon operating systems, the redirect serves as useful. Jennytacular (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• (edit conflict) Weak keep for a couple of reasons:
  1. What "others" are there? Could help to list those.
  2. I'm not finding any information on Wikipedia about the OS on the Amazon Fire Stick. My guess then would be the redirect is good as is, and the target may be able to have the Fire Stick OS information added to it.

– Steel1943 (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be no "Fire Stick OS", as it runs Fire OS as well as other Amazon consumer electronics, so maybe Jeffhardyfan08 accidentally got it confused as seperate. The only other Amazon "operating system" I could find is Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud, but it is a virtual machine rental and not an OS. Therefor, it redirecting to Fire OS is where it should be as like I mentioned earlier it is the only Amazon operating system that is notable. Jennytacular (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, while Fire OS has never officially been referred to as Amazon OS, considering there is no other OS made by Amazon this is the most plausible place it could go to as people may simply just refer to Fire OS as Amazon OS if its not specific to the Kindle Fire (yes I still call it the Kindle Fire even though they've changed it to Amazon Fire). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 01:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Rio Claro(São Paulo) → Rio Claro, São Paulo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Rio Claro(Sao Paulo) → Rio Claro, São Paulo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete both per WP:RDAB due to the lack of space between the title and the disambiguator. The properly-spaced variants, Rio Claro (São Paulo) and Rio Claro (Sao Paulo), exist and are redirects that target the same target as the nominated redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the 1st was only there back in 2005 and the 2nd wasn't created from a move. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 the created article. Jay 💬 06:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Catholic Studies → Catholic theology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Catholic studies → Catholic theology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very vague expression. The expression is never used to refer to Catholic theology, and I have no idea what it could refer to. Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. We have Category:Catholic studies and there is a Center for Catholic Studies. StAnselm (talk) 15:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC) And retarget Catholic Studies to Catholic studies. StAnselm (talk) 21:01, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The category seems like pure OR. How are Suppression of the Society of Jesus and Anti-Catholicism considered as "studies"? What are Catholic studies? Veverve (talk) 15:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic studies refers to the study of the history, theology, and organization of the Roman Catholic Church. StAnselm (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I am familiar with institutions that offer degrees and programs in "Catholic studies", such as Ave Maria, so I think it's a prevalent enough term for retention. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:01, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but retarget to Catholic Church. "Catholic studies" is used when one specifically wants a broader term than Catholic theology. Jahaza (talk) 16:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Concur on retarget. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Actually, I think this is worth an article, as an academic discipline. StAnselm (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And here is an excellent article that explains what it actually is. StAnselm (talk) 16:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agreed on the desirability of having an article. (Will add it to my to do list.) Just think it should be retargeted in the meantime. Jahaza (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Article created. StAnselm (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note, the article was created at Catholic studies. Steel1943 (talk) 02:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to new article at Catholic studies - It's a stub, but looks worthy of being an article to me. It is a legitimate field of study after all. Fieari (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the new stub article at Catholic studies, and retarget Catholic Studies there per above. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:17, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 01:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Terminology used in the Traditionalist Catholic debate → Traditionalist Catholicism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No terminology section or content at the target. The 2005 AfD ended up with a redirect and a possibility to merge later; I do not know if the content was ever merged. None of the content of this AfDed article was ever sourced.

Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 13:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: A classic leftover from IPs could create articles. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per nom. No objection to someone creating this as an article, mind you, as long as said article was well sourced. Fieari (talk) 07:19, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 01:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• GrillSmith → The Melting Pot (restaurant)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Burger 21 → The Melting Pot (restaurant)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These were originally redirects to Front Burner Brands which was WP:BLARred with the target of The Melting Pot (restaurant) on 10 October 2021 to cleanup copyvio. These then got targeted to The Melting Pot (restaurant), but are unmentioned in that article. TartarTorte 13:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom. Veverve (talk) 13:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 implement PatrickR2's proposal. Going through the incoming links will be time-consuming, and will be done little by little by PatrickR2 and/or 1234qwer1234qwer4. Jay 💬 06:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Quotient map → Quotient space (topology)#Quotient map  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Quotient maps are equally fundamental for a Quotient space (linear algebra). 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also quotient rings, quotient modules, quotient groups (mentioned as "canonical projection" in the article), quotient monoids, etc. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It is true that the notion of quotient map appears in multiple areas of mathematics. It is also true that there are quite a few subtleties regarding this notion in the context of topological spaces, as compared with linear algebra for example. So it is useful to have a link to the relevant portion of Quotient space (topology) instead of a generic link to Equivalence class for example. I suggest: (1) introduce a new redirect Quotient map (topology) with same target as the current Quotient map; (2) examine all places that currently link to Quotient map and replace them with the new link if having to do with topology; (3) after the previous step has been completed, replace Quotient map with a redirect to Equivalence class which it used to have before 2015. PatrickR2 (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@1234qwer1234qwer4: What do you think of the suggestion? Jay 💬 06:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems plausible to me. 1234qwer1234qwer4 07:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 13:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• PatrickR2 and 1234qwer1234qwer4, as we have consensus, can one of you perform the steps? There are 23 incoming links and you may know best on how to sort them. If it is going to be time-consuming, I can close this RfD with the provision that the changes will be done by you. Jay 💬 11:16, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I will not be able to get to this right away, but I can start doing it little by little. PatrickR2 (talk) 05:26, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  But if 1234qwer1234qwer4 wants to have a go at it, that's perfectly fine with me. PatrickR2 (talk) 05:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Salvio ^giuliano 20:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Gets s → C file input/output#Overview of functions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article. Apparently, this redirect is meant to represent a function by the name "gets_s()" (Wikipedia page titles can't had underscores, thus the space instead of an underscore) that is used for string/character input, but I'm unable to confirm if it's part of any standard C header library. Either way, no mention in the target article makes it so readers won't find what they are looking for if they search this term. Steel1943 (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 13:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as confusing per nom's explanation. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Salvio ^giuliano 20:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Native oppositors against Japanese regime(WW2) → Japanese militarism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

In addition to the WP:RDAB issue with this redirect due to no space between the title and the disambiguator, the redirect is unclear on what in the target article it is meant to refer. Steel1943 (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 13:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:16, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. Salvio ^giuliano 20:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Navy Unit Commendation(United States) → Navy Unit Commendation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete per WP:RDAB due to lack of since between title and disambiguator. However, the title with correct spacing, Navy Unit Commendation (United States), currently does not exist. Steel1943 (talk) 04:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete due to malformed modifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 10:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete the nominated redirect because of the malformed modifier but Navy Unit Commendation (United States) should be created because it is a plausible search term. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 06:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).