Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 August 27

August 27
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 27, 2018.

Bumfuck
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 trainwreck, default to delete all  since the consensus is that the current target is inappropriate, but different outcomes have been proposed for the various titles.  If you feel strongly about any of these titles, you're welcome to create a new redirect or soft redirect at any of these titles as you see fit. Deryck C. 09:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Bumfuck → Placeholder name (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bumfuck&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Bumblefuck → Placeholder name (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bumblefuck&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Bumfuck egypt → Placeholder name (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bumfuck_egypt&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This, ugh, does not seem to be the primary topic for that term. Nowak Kowalski (talk) 21:58, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Bumfuck Egypt → Placeholder name (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bumfuck_Egypt&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Question Do you want to add all the redirected titles listed here, including Bumblefuck, Bumfuck Egypt, Thingus, Tiddlypom, and Whatshisname? Largoplazo (talk) 22:58, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would add only, and . Thingus and Whatshisname should stay, as they are obvious placeholder names;  may be worthy of another discussion. Nowak Kowalski (talk) 16:51, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect to bumfuck, which lists both the placeholder name sense and the anal sex sense, with the added information that the former is considered vulgar and derogatory, whereas the current target both fails to mention the term and only provides one of its possible meanings. I can't find any other relevant uses of the word in the encyclopaedia. (I'd caution against adding the other redirects to this nomination, as there are quite significant differences in relevance and frequency of use, but each might be worth nominating individually.) – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 12:17, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - bumfuck egypt and bumfuck Egypt; there are many variations of "bumfuck nowhere/x" and no need to soft redirects them all, especially taking Wikimedia sister projects into account. If these two were to be soft redirected, they should go to Bumfuck, Egypt. That aside, an article on Bumfuck, Nowhere might be possible. Retarget bumblefuck to Bumblefuck, USA (maybe along with the addition of a wikt box). Neutral on bumfuck, though redirecting it to anal sex may be the best option. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 01:39, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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


 * The result of the discussion was withdrawn by nominator.    AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * جيمس خان → James Caan (entrepreneur) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%AC%D9%8A%D9%85%D8%B3_%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%86&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

no affinity to Arabic, recently created AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:13, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, it matches the Urdu name listed in the infobox. Assuming that's correct, this redirect is also correct. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:19, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oops, didn't see that. Withdrawing as it's related to Pakistan for sure. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Freddy Mercurie
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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) feminist (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Freddy Mercurie → Freddie Mercury (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Freddy_Mercurie&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No affinity to French, unlikely misspelling, recently created. I could understand Freddy Mercury since Mercury is spelled with Y, but Mercurie is not a likely spelling, and if it were, it would be IE on both words. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I don't see what it would have to with French, in which the name for the Roman god is "Mercure". It could be that someone knew that one of the names ended in -y and the other in -ie and kept forgetting which is which (like forgetting which consonants are duplicated in "exaggerate" and which ones aren't) and figured on helping others with the same problem. I don't know how likely that is, but I can see the potential for helpfulness and it's harmless. Largoplazo (talk) 17:06, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Largoplazo. Also, though most new R from typos are unnecessary at best, the search engine gives totally useless results for this particular typo (search on Simple English Wikipedia where this redirect doesn't exist, to see what the search engine does in its absence). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 00:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's still two typos away from the correct name, per WP:RTYPO this is not likely. Searcher would either go with all Y's or all IE's. And by typing "Freddy Merc" in, they should get the right one in the suggested search spellings. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 00:56, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * "Two typos" would be something like Greddie Nercury where someone hit two different off-by-one keys. As LargoPlazo points out, this is basically a single misspelling (swapping two phonetically equivalent parts of the name). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:02, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Phonetic misspellings are usually helpful for those who hear the name but may not know how it's spelled. -- Tavix ( talk ) 01:24, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per the above, especially 59.149's point regarding the search engine. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Upcoming Nas album
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 16:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Upcoming Nas album → Nasir (album) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Upcoming_Nas_album&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

As Nasir has already been released, the title "Upcoming Nas album" no longer makes sense. —  Newslinger  talk   14:22, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Nas, the final sentence of which describes an upcoming album. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was a placeholder page title that is no longer needed to hold a place. -- Tavix ( talk ) 14:24, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per those above and many similar discussions in the past. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 09:13, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Field Music(military)
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 16:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Field Music(military) → Corps of drums (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Field_Music(military)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Unlikely search term / incorrect spacing. Compare with Field music (military). Senator2029 “Talk” 22:11, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom. Incorrectly generated redirect whose properly created one already exists and does the job. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 22:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RDAB and WP:R. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 09:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. The fact that this was created suggests that it's a plausible typo. To my knowledge there's no other topic to which this could possibly refer, so there's no risk of confusion and no harm done. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 12:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per . The incorrect spacing makes this redirect unnecessary. —  Newslinger  talk   02:57, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of racist attack on Africans in India
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 7%23List of racist attack on Africans in India

سكس
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:17, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * <span id="سكس">سكس → Sex (disambiguation) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس اوربي">سكس اوربي → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%A7%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس صور">سكس صور → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس عربي">سكس عربي → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس فرنسي">سكس فرنسي → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%81%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%B3%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس لبنان">سكس لبنان → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%86&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس لبناني">سكس لبناني → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%84%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس مصر">سكس مصر → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس مصري">سكس مصري → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="سكس ورعان">سكس ورعان → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%88%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%86&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="صور سكس">صور سكس → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="صور سكس فرنسي">صور سكس فرنسي → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D9%81%D8%B1%D9%86%D8%B3%D9%8A&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="صور كس">صور كس → Pornography (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1_%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * <span id="نيك">نيك → Sexual intercourse (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%83&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="فديو سكس">فديو سكس → Pornographic film (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%81%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%88_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="فلم سكس">فلم سكس → Pornographic film (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%81%D9%84%D9%85_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="سكس حيوانات">سكس حيوانات → Zoophilia (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="سكس حيوانات مع نساء">سكس حيوانات مع نساء → Zoophilia (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D9%85%D8%B9_%D9%86%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%A1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="كلاب ونساء">كلاب ونساء → Zoophilia (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%83%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A8_%D9%88%D9%86%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%A1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="بنات سكس">بنات سكس → Adolescent sexuality (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="رقص سكس">رقص سكس → Erotic dance (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%B5_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="سكس حيوانات مع نساء">سكس حيوانات مع نساء → Zoophilia (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3_%D8%AD%D9%8A%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D9%85%D8%B9_%D9%86%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%A1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="كلاب ونساء">كلاب ونساء → Zoophilia (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%83%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%A8_%D9%88%D9%86%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%A1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="بنات سكس">بنات سكس → Adolescent sexuality (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="رقص سكس">رقص سكس → Erotic dance (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%B5_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="بنات سكس">بنات سكس → Adolescent sexuality (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%A8%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="رقص سكس">رقص سكس → Erotic dance (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%B5_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="رقص سكس">رقص سكس → Erotic dance (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%B5_%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%B3&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Textbook examples of redirects that shouldn't be created per WP:RFOREIGN: a user typing an Arabic phrase meaning "sex videos" will be taken to our relevant article and hence that user might assume that they can search in a similar way for other topics. All of these redirects appear to have been created because they were popular as search queries (and hence appeared in Most-missed articles and the like). – Uanfala (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Now I see there was a similar discussion five years ago Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November 10, which resulted in "no consensus". The keep rationales there were based on the fact that the redirects were receiving a lot of pageviews: even if we ignore the obvious source of that (people going online to search for porn and using the wrong search engine by mistake), this only strengthens the case for deletion as there is a much larger popularion of users that are being misled by these redirects. – Uanfala (talk) 15:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Pinging participants of the previous discussion:, , , , , . – Uanfala (talk) 15:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting for more input as even though the five-year-old discussion ended as no consensus, a number of these still have significant viewership (as might be expected given their prurient nature) and the closer explicitly mentioned an exception to WP:FORRED. I'd like a bit more discussion on those topics before proceeding to overturn.
 * Wow. Delete all. As Uanfala says, classic cases of WP:FORRED. — Gorthian (talk) 20:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 12:17, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTDICTIONARY. No reason for anyone to be searching for those terms in Arabic on English Wikipedia. Largoplazo (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RFOREIGN and per the translations provided at the previous discussion. It seems obvious to me that someone using these search terms is wanting actual pornography, not just an encyclopedia article on the topic. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Some of them are poor targets anyway! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:DELREASON
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 Deletion policy and keep, respectively. Those wanting to preserve the status quo aren't wrong, inasmuch as we can have situations like this just based on how different redirects were developed, but a majority of editors here made a persuasive argument why that shouldn't be the case here. --BDD (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2018 (UTC)


 * DELREASON → Wikipedia:Overzealous deletion (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:DELREASON&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * DEL-REASON → Wikipedia:Deletion policy (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:DEL-REASON&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

These two projectspace shortcuts are only subtly different. Having them point to two different targets is apt to cause confusion. — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 11:23, 17 August 2018 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Agree, retarget DELREASON to Deletion_policy. Overzealous deletion has 5 shortcuts already. Sam Sailor 11:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't retarget either. We should be very careful about retargeting shortcuts, as doing so changes the meaning of comments and !votes that refer to them. To pick an example at random: MichaelQSchmidt's comment "See WP:DELREASON" at Articles for deletion/Vellakkuppayam takes on a wholly different meaning if the shortcut's target is changed. It's important that old deletion discussions (and any other discussions these might have been used in) are left intact for the benefit of any future readers who might be interested in revisiting the article, nominating it for deletion again or for deletion review, etc. The potential confusion between the two similar shortcuts is better resolved with hatnotes than by retargeting either. (If there is a consensus that these ought to point to the same target though, it should be WP:DELREASON that's changed, as it's much less widely used than WP:DEL-REASON.) – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 14:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't retarget either – as per the rationale above by Arms &amp; Hearts. No need to create ambiguity in past discussions. North America1000 21:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:DELREASON only has, which could easily be replaced with "Overzealous deletion" (possibly with piping) to keep old discussions intact. WP:DEL-REASON has . — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 08:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is why I included the comment in parentheses at the end of my !vote. You're right that it would be a straightforward solution, but I'm of the opinion that using hatnotes to distinguish the two shortcuts is an even more elegant solution that doesn't require us to make any changes to anyone else's comments. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Editors may not immediately follow the links to reach the hatnotes but inaccurately assume they go to the same place after becoming familiar with one or the other, eventually likely culminating in a WP:SURPRISE or not and leaving them in a state of unknowing. — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 11:52, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget WP:DELREASON as per Sam Sailor. Having two subtly different shortcuts targeting different things, and can easily lead to people linking the wrong thing; indeed looking at the 25 links to WP:DELREASON I think most are actually meant to target the policy, not the essay, so this retargeting would indeed fix more links then it breaks (the ambiguity in past discussions already exists). Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:11, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:31, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget - It's rare to link to overzealous in this fashion, so I think the retarget does make sense. Obviously a hatnote would need to be added, preferably above the section, not the page. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:16, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Support provided the prior usage is relinked as suggested above.  Per WP:CREEP, we should be trying to roll back such confusion so that the similar shortcuts go to the same place. Andrew D. (talk) 17:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't retarget either per Arms & Hearts. We should always be extremely wary of retargetting shortcuts that have been used, and while Andrew D's desire to roll back confusion is admirable, attempting that in this case would just lead to different confusion negating any benefits there might be. Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget WP:DELREASON to Deletion policy, which lists the actual reasons for deletion per the deletion policy, rather than an essay on the topic. -- Tavix ( talk ) 14:07, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Deletion policy I'm sympathetic to the argument about rewriting historical, but it's surprising at best and confusing at worst to have these two go to different places. Better to send them to an established policy rather than an essay. ~  Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 21:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mota Varachha
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 7%23Mota Varachha

Cinnamon stix
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . Not seeing any general agreement or consensus on an outcome.  Between keep and disambiguation maybe this leans toward "having content," but there's no real agreement. ~  Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 01:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Cinnamon stix → Cinnamon (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cinnamon_stix&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This strikes me as a useless redirect. Some of you are experts on the subject matter--please have a look at the user's other creations, including Taking a poop. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom as recently created. There are multiple products that use the "Stix" name, but do not refer to the Cinnamon sticks themselves. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC) updated 18:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Striking above vote for disambiguation AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete this one, and review all of these, many of which are just silly. Magical poop-stealing water chair and Ice cold cow juice already tagged for speedy. Home Lander (talk) 02:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. It seems plausible enough that one might spell cinnamon sticks (which points to the same target) in this way. They're also sold under this name, at least occasionally. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as an alternate spelling of "cinnamon sticks", making this an . Thryduulf (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per AngusWOOF—besides the redirect's recency, it seems likely readers would be searching for a particular product or thing. A song of this name is mentioned at E. Kidd Bogart, allegedly performed by ZZ Ward, for example. --BDD (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment so... delete this, or make it a disambiguation page with the song and and the alternate spelling of "cinnamon sticks"? Colgatepony234 (talk) 13:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to a disambiguation page, but I do oppose deletion as that wont help anybody (indeed it will hinder them). Thryduulf (talk) 12:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Disambiguation is fine. I've put in the entries for the stick, the breadstick, and the song. My guess is that they used Stix to distinguish the bread stick from the actual stick  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:09, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * That's still a bit shaky. The breadsticks entry fails MOS:DABMENTION. --BDD (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It's in the article: "In many North American restaurants, breadsticks are frequently topped with butter, garlic, and cheese when served as appetizers; as a dessert item, they can be topped with cinnamon sugar and icing" AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 19:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Some good arguments but I'm not convinced by any of them or see a general consensus yet. Let's give another relist.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:19, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment How much longer is this discussion gonna take? It's been going on for like 3 weeks now. I don't think I've ever seen a redirect discussion that goes for this long before... Colgatepony234 (talk) 02:11, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, it's happened! There have certainly been discussions relisted thrice. Some probably more, though that's the point where I'm likely to just call it no consensus. --BDD (talk) 14:56, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * ,, is dab okay now or would still prefer keep/delete?  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:17, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen a source for the breadsticks entry, and I think that WP:DABMENTION should probably read as requiring the phrase be mentioned somewhere in the article, rather than just a description of something with no indication that it's known by this name (which is what Breadstick currently contains). I'd prefer a disambiguation page to deletion, but at present I still think keeping it at the current target (with a hatnote for the song, I suppose) is preferable to either of those options. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * You mean like   Auntie Anne's Cinnamon Sugar Stix (bread stick with cinnamon coat)   Cinnabon Stix ?  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * If kept, then redirects here is in order, and hatnotes need to go to breadsticks and to the song. Most use of "stix" in general search refer to the breadstick brands rather than the stick itself. Same in book searches.      AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:47, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Some of those links seem to refer to breadsticks, though none of the first six links use the word "bread" in relation to the product in question, and others confuse things almost as much as they clarify: 1,000 Low-Calorie Recipes contains a dish called "Cinnamon Stix with Maple Crème" that it describes as a version of French toast, while Brand Eating has a photo that looks more like cheese straws or some sort of doughnut product (cf. File:Yumyums-Plate.png) than breadsticks. It seems that the phrase refers to a few different bread-based products in a stick shape, including but not limited to breadsticks in the sense defined in our article on the subject. So, all in all I'm still unconvinced – there's a relation, but it's a tenuous one and not obviously much stronger than the relation to other notable foodstuffs; in combination with the fact that the phrase isn't mentioned in the breadstick article I'm still inclined to favour keeping this pointing to the current target. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - I can see creating a disambiguation page, but the core thing here is that the redirect appears valid. 'Cinnamon Sticks' are a valid food product, and this wording is simple a different phonetic way of saying that. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment There's no point continuing with the discussion since there's literally no consensus. This discussion has gone on for over a month. Colgatepony234 (talk) 19:10, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sackful
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 Sack (unit). (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Sackful → wiktionary:Special:Search/sackful (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sackful&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I declined speedy for this since the Wiktionary redirect template has a purpose. This is a very unlikely title to search for on Wikipedia, however, therefore nominating for deletion. Tóraí (talk) 22:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget to Sack (unit) as a unit of measure. Otherwise Sack (disambiguation) may apply. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 01:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. The fact that someone's seen fit to create this is for me sufficient evidence that it's a plausible search term. The Wiktionary entry defines the word, which no Wikipedia article does, and so provides the reader with what we can assume they're looking for. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 18:54, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Sack (unit). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:06, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Sack (unit) as a plausible variant for the measurement unit per AngusWOOF -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:23, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose retaining it as a soft redirect. Sack (unit) might be an okay retarget but I'd would like to see it added there as a synonym (and possibly explained). — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 05:39, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Sack (unit), as suggested above. Andrew D. (talk) 06:23, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

This Week (BBC News TV series)
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 02:34, 8 September 2018 (UTC)


 * <span id="This Week (BBC News TV series)">This Week (BBC News TV series) → Reporters (TV series) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=This_Week_(BBC_News_TV_series)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This redirect targets Reporters (TV series), but that article makes no mention of "This Week" being an alternate title for this TV program. In addition, This Week (BBC TV series) also exists, and that would seem to be the "correct" target for this redirect. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget to This Week (BBC TV series), add hatnote for other "This Week" shows in the UK. Also note that This Week (BBC TV series) is getting a rename request.  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:51, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. From the history it does look as though Reporters was previously titled This Week, and the article was at this title for six years. The former name would ideally be mentioned in the article though. This Week (BBC TV series) seems to have only ever aired on BBC One, so "This Week (BBC News TV series)", which one expects would refer to a programme (such as Reporters) that airs or aired on the BBC News channel, is not a particularly plausible search term for it. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 23:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per Arms and Hearts, and add a hatnote to This Week (2003 TV programme) (the new location of This Week (BBC TV series)) and optionally This Week (disambiguation). Thryduulf (talk) 11:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to This Week (2003 TV programme). If we add a hatnote, it should be from there to Reporters (TV series)—iff we can demonstrate that This Week was also a valid title for that series. --BDD (talk) 16:17, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. As the above has shown, no matter where this goes there may be confusion of some form. Because this is not a useful redirect for searching due to its disambiguator, deletion is the best option. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:20, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:12, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – basically as per Tavix. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Denim (color)
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 List of colors: A-F. There is a clear consensus to retarget this, but where to is less clear. There were objections to everything other than the list, and the mention there appears to have been added after some commenters expressed their views and meets at least most of the things they were looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 14:12, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * <span id="Denim (color)">Denim (color) → Indigo (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denim_(color)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Should be redirected to List of Crayola crayon colors after information about the color was removed from the Indigo article Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 14:40, 7 August 2018 (UTC)


 * CommentDenim is not a color, it's a textile, however in the List of Crayola crayon colors there are a couple of sources that Denim color is a Crayola thing. On the other hand, to support that claim both references (this and this) are deadlinks. Are there better sources that can still support it? --1l2l3k (talk) 17:53, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep. Those searching or linking to this exact title want a colour. Give them a colour. But this is "weak" because the target article doesn't mention "denim". Deryck C. 13:33, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 17:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget to Denim that discusses what colors are associated with denim. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 01:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to List of Crayola crayon colors, with an anchor at the relevant table row. Someone searching for "denim (color)" is most likely to be looking for a colour called denim, rather than the colour(s) of denim (Denim or Indigo), and List of Crayola crayon colors seems to be the only mention of such a colour in the encyclopaedia. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 18:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget, but to List of colors: A–F, potentially anchored. I reject the notion that "denim" can't be a considered a color in its own right, apart from its Crayola usage. Nevertheless, my proposed list has a link to the Crayola list if that's what users are looking for. --BDD (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:11, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget - I agree with taking this to 'List of colors: A–F' given that denim as a color exists conceptually outside of crayons. At any rate, besides, I want to make it clear that we absolutely should keep this redirect and bring it somewhere. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Studies in the Psychology of Sex Vol. 1
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 Havelock Ellis. (non-admin closure)  —  Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 09:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Studies in the Psychology of Sex Vol. 1 → Studies in the Psychology of Sex Vol. 2 (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Studies_in_the_Psychology_of_Sex_Vol._1&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The content of this page dealt with the matter in Volume 2. having a redirect is not helpful. Wayne Jayes (talk) 05:57, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Havelock Ellis. The article was at this location for 15 months until yesterday, so deleting the redirect left by the move is likely to cause confusion. The Ellis article contains just about enough relevant information to be useful. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 11:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Ellis's article for now and clean up the other Volumes so they are clear what they cover. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:04, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of most populous nations by 2025
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . Deryck C. 09:45, 5 September 2018 (UTC)


 * List of most populous nations by 2025 → Projections of population growth (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_most_populous_nations_by_2025&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Most populous nations by 2025 → Projections of population growth (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Most_populous_nations_by_2025&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete. This redirect has been listed for deletion before, closed with no consensus. Now the redirect goal is gone, unlikely to come back, and there is no obvious good replacement; note that List of countries by future population (United Nations, medium fertility variant) does not even contain a prediction for the year 2025. In seven years, this redirect will be obsolete anyway. Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Added, the R from list topic of the nominated redirect. The content about 2025 was removed from the target in 2011. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 05:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. The target has information on population projections for cities in 2025, and nations in 2030, but nothing on nations in 2025. World population estimates has a projection for the world's population in 2025 but nothing about particular nations. List of countries by future population (United Nations, medium fertility variant) has projections for particular nations in 2020 and 2030 but not 2025. There doesn't seem to be any relevant information in any other articles. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 11:37, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. These are certainly very plausible search terms now (that they wont be in 7 years is irrelevant), but like Arms & Hearts I've been unable to find that we have any content that matches the search terms. Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.