Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 8

March 8
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 8, 2020.

Enkyklopaideia
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Enkyklopaideia

Encyclopedia of silliness
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Encyclopedia of silliness

Blocking minority
 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 disambiguate  . (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Blocking minority → Voting in the Council of the European Union (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blocking_minority&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I believe that this term has applications beyond that of only voting in the council of the EU, and could be misleading to searchers. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete . It's ambiguous: from the Cambridge Dictionary, "someone who has a blocking minority in a company owns enough of that company's shares to prevent other companies buying or controlling it". See e.g. Bernard Arnault. Narky Blert (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep pending change to Disambiguation. The term clearly has currency, how does deletion solve anything? So find or create an article that describes controlling shares and then we have the basis for a disambiguation article. Meanwhile, let the redirection stand. --Red King (talk) 14:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment' it can be articl-ified per the Cambridge def and the EU article into a stub -- 70.51.46.77 (talk) 20:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pending an article, this redirect inhibits the use of Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - Could be a reasonable enough disambiguation page between (a)the corporate meaning of the term, (b)the EU meaning of the term, and (c)the meaning of the term in the U.S. Senate in terms of the filibuster (and other measures such as 'secret holds')? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

I have edited the article so that it is now a redirect as discussed above. No doubt it can be improved, please feel free to do so. --Red King (talk) 11:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: A disambiguation has been drafted, but I'm not seeing a clear consensus in favor of disambiguation. Please continue to discuss.
 * Changed to redirect

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 23:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate (changing !vote). I've added a see-also to the draft. Narky Blert (talk) 09:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate (changing !vote). My own conclusion from the discussion above was the case against a simple redirect was convincing and that it could not stand. Even if I say so myself, I think that the draft disambig article has turned out to be a good outcome of this discussion. Incidentally, Google search turns up fewer direct uses of the phrase than are listed, because it contains logical 'synomyns'.--Red King (talk) 21:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Pronunciation of X
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Pronunciation of X

How to pronounce English
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23How to pronounce English

/°C
 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  . signed,Rosguill talk 18:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * /°C → Thermal expansion (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=/%C2%B0C&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The coefficient of thermal expansion can be expressed as the reciprocal of temperature, but as far as I can see – and I'm no physicist or engineer – so can any other temperature-dependent coefficient. – Uanfala (talk) 16:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The reciprocal of temperature makes no sense on its own, only as an element of a unit; such as in Coefficient of thermal expansion and Heat transfer coefficient. Narky Blert (talk) 17:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget to SI derived unit. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 04:51, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 23:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Reciprocal temperature makes as much sense as reciprocal pressure, acceleration, or longitude; i.e. none at all. Narky Blert (talk) 16:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, I don't see this making sense at the current target nor the proposed retarget. Perhaps there is a target that makes sense, but I'm not seeing it. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Jon Perrin
 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 John Perrin (disambiguation). (non-admin closure)  NASCARfan0548   ↗  01:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Jon Perrin → Kansas City Royals minor league players (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jon_Perrin&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No longer mentioned at the list he was once mentioned at and does not appear to be affiliated with a professional baseball currently (and has not been in the Royals organization since 2018). One mention at 2014 Baylor Bears baseball team as having lost a game to Baylor, a mention in a list at Mankato MoonDogs, and is on a roster list at 2015 Oklahoma State Cowboys baseball team. John Perrin is also a disambiguation page. I'd say either retarget (maybe to the dab page?) or delete per WP:XY, none of these potential targets seem to claim priority aside from the dab page. Hog Farm (talk) 20:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget per WP:CHEAP to John Perrin (disambiguation) as R from ambiguous term. It doesn't matter that no-one on that page seems to be a "Jon"; a reader might not know the actual spelling. Narky Blert (talk) 17:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 23:15, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget per Narky as R from misspelling. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:53, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Windy Apple
 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  . -- Tavix  ( talk ) 16:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The Windy Apple → Springfield (The Simpsons) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Windy_Apple&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Not mentioned at target article, 14 pageviews in 2019, no real utility. Hog Farm (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2020 (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-ish keep due to the low-ish pageviews. No other English Wikipedia articles mention The Windy Apple and, upon doing some Google searches, I can see it's the nickname for the fictional capital city of the state in which the Simpson family. As well, from what I can tell, no other places are called The Windy Apple, so there's little to no ambiguity or confusion per WP:R and WP:XY. Thus, it's harmless and, potentially, modestly useful. I would add R from fictional location, R without mention, R to section, and, possibly, R for convenience. Doug Mehus T · C  03:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 23:39, 27 February 2020 (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.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed,Rosguill talk 23:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not mentioned anywhere so should not be a redirect. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 07:16, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Xpert Engine On
<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  . -- Tavix  ( talk ) 16:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Xpert Engine On → Xeon (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xpert_Engine_On&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Not mentioned at the target, doesn't appear to be an alternative name for the subject. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed,Rosguill talk 23:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - what User:Rosguill said. Teh Google doesn't seem to find much about "Xpert Engine On". Guy Harris (talk) 02:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Intelligent Technology and Electronics
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Intelligent Technology and Electronics

Hitler dead
<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 keep  by others. (non-admin closure) 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:52, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Hitler dead → Death of Adolf Hitler (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hitler_dead&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Grammar dead. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep This is an easy to excuse search term if English is not your primary language. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 23:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep This is probably in reference to the big Stars & Stripes headline, as seen at the top of our article. I can see a little bit of harm in that a reader could be looking for something about that article (cf. Dewey Defeats Truman), and we only give the image, with no specific discussion. But overall, I think this is reasonable. --BDD (talk) 00:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - Logical search term, redirects don't have to be perfect grammar. Hog Farm (talk) 02:58, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per others and WP:R. —&thinsp; J 947  (user &#124; cont &#124; ess), at 05:53, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Deſign
<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  . -- Tavix  ( talk ) 16:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * <span id="Deſign">Deſign → Design (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=De%C5%BFign&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No reason a reader would search for the term with a long s. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see a good reason for this either. Biogeographist (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - No clear reason to insert the nonstandard character, not helpful. Hog Farm (talk) 02:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Thiſ iſ not the eighteenth century. Narky Blert (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You don't use the long s in final poſition. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:35, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Curſes, you're right of courſe. Narky Blert (talk) 16:48, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Shurely shome mishtake! Designergene (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Shak-spere
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Shak-spere

Generation V
<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 Fifth generation. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Generation V → Generation Z (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Generation_V&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I notice that there is old history on this page, but it is presently not mentioned in the target, and the topic of the previous article does not appear to be a notable concept, searches predominately come up with results about generation V Pokémon, but I would advise against retargeting there as it might be confusing for people who come across sources such as this, so I suggest deletion if there is no reason to disambiguate. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:10, 18 February 2020 (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 made up by the author as their own name for Generation Z. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:15, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep. Seems to be the same case as "Homelanders", above, traceable to a single Forbes writer and picked up by nearly no one else other than random bloggers.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:19, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is no evidence of common usage for this term. Moreover, it is quite confusing. Nerd271 (talk) 16:11, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. When a whole bunch of RS use it consistently and it starts appearing in dictionaries, and we have something encyclopedic (WP:NOTDICT) to say about it, then include it. This isn't ProtologismPedia. Cf. also WP:NFT.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:19, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate to Gen V pokemon and Generation V reactor, LS based GM small-block engine with see also to Fifth generation AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Fifth generation. Practice for generations 1-4 have the disambiguation pages (at "Nth generation") include both uses. No need to duplicate efforts. --BDD (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget Per BDD. Least confusion, most useful.  I'd be a little concerned given it has been this way for over a decade, but beyond the merge discussion, it seems quite reasonable. ~  Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 17:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 's proposal would be okay. I'm wondering about Gen IV and some leftovers like that. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 23:09, 28 February 2020 (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.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect as suggested would also make sense. Nerd271 (talk) 20:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Yup yup yup
<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.  --BDD (talk) 19:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Yup yup yup → The Land Before Time (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yup_yup_yup&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Has other uses beyond that in The Land Before Time, delete as ambiguous. Hog Farm (talk) 02:36, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment (was Keep ) Yes, it's got potential other users, but any extant to English Wikipedia? Even still, it's one of the most memorable lines in the film, not unlike, "life's like a box of chocolates...you never know what yer gonna get," is to Forrest Gump, so I think it's potentially at least a weak-ish primary topic here. If not, I'm willing to invoke WP:IAR here. Doug Mehus T · C  02:53, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem seems to be that the phrase isn't even worthy of a sourced mentioned, let alone discussion in the current article. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:31, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't really care about sourcing for redirects, though, as long as it's plausible and there are no other targets extant to existing English Wikipedia articles. I can confirm there are offline sources which do confirm this line from the film, but equally important, the primary source (i.e., the film) is just as valid and can be used, per WP:VERIFIABILITY. Doug Mehus T · C  14:40, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment it mentioned at List of The Land Before Time characters with the spelling "yep, yep, yep". However it is not sourced there, and I can only find marginal-looking sources like which mention it. The paucity of WP:RS and usage suggests it's nowhere near the fame of "like's like a box of chocolates". List of Tiny Toon Adventures characters mentions another unrelated fictional character who says "yup yup yup". 59.149.124.29 (talk) 12:45, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I can, with certainty, say that offline reliable sources do exist for this phrasing. Moreover, we have primary reliable sources, which confirm this phrasing. I would support a retargeting there, but given that it's mentioned in the first film, I think refining the existing target to where Ducky is mentioned is better. We could add R from misspelling and then create a second redirect for Yep yep yep for the correct spelling. Or, alternatively, retarget yup yup yup to the suggested target by the IP editor, and yep yep yep to either of the two targets. Doug Mehus T · C  14:36, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Question for 59.149.124.29, what exactly is "marginal" about Syracuse.com? It's a born-digital, hyper-local news publication owned by Advance Local LLC, itself part of Advance Digital, that is itself owned by Cond&eacute; Nast owner Advance Publications. I have no concerns about its editorial reliability whatsoever. Doug Mehus T · C  16:13, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * My exact words were "marginal-looking". In particular, the "byline" on the Syracuse.com piece is the name of a zoo rather than the name of a journalist, which made it look like a reprint of a press release or native advertising or something similar. I remain neutral between deletion and retargetting. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 59.149.124.29 Okay, thank you for clarifying that. Doug Mehus T · C  02:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Retarget (1st choice) to List of The Land Before Time characters per 59.149.124.29's find, where it's mentioned explicitly, with rcats R to section, R from catchphrase, R from fictional element, and R from alternative spelling; otherwise,
 * Keep at its current location (2nd choice) with rcats R to article without mention, R from catchphrase, R from alternative spelling, and R from fictional element. No real reason for deletion here. Doug Mehus T · C  00:28, 22 February 2020 (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.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 11:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Even though I am an IP currently, I would like to say Delete because people who have watched the film are the only people who would get the reference and even then, they are very very unlikely to search up The Land Before Time this way. 209.237.105.108 (talk) 18:56, 28 February 2020 (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.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 22:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, too vague. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 07:17, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, not really plausible as a search term for the suggested targets. signed,Rosguill talk 18:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Customs and Immigration
<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  . I realize how unsatisfying this is bound to be, but there simply isn't consensus for any one course of action. By my count, the thinnest plurality favored deletion, but this was still ultimately a minority position. Nor was there the sort of unanimous consensus against the status quo that would make me call no consensus but still retarget somewhere. Should anyone want to try creating a broad-concept article as discussed, that might be welcome. --BDD (talk) 19:23, 20 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Customs and Immigration → International airport (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Customs_and_Immigration&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No action recommended, just looking for feedback about the redirect. Prisencolin (talk) 01:19, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * My thoughts for this redirect were that "Customs and Immigration", especially in that order, is most likely to refer to the process at airports. Customs, a related topic, is another possibility, with government agencies being a less likely intended search target. as far as I can tell, the only government agency with an article on Wikipedia that includes "Customs and Immigration" in their names in that order is States of Jersey Customs and Immigration Service. Confusingly, the previous target for this redirect, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), doesn't actually conduct customs checks at borders, a task left to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. ICE is mostly known for carrying out deportations. signed,Rosguill talk 01:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I question the value of this redirect. Immigration and customs doesn't exist, even though in my experience that's the usual order of processing. Land and sea routes are also important, notably in Europe. One role of the UK Border Force is to check for illegal immigrants, so that checking the contents of a lorry is a combined customs and immigration operation. Narky Blert (talk) 06:39, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * My comments are similar to the above in that I would prefer to see Customs and immigration, with Customs and Immigration using R from other capitalisation, target to a generic article on foreign affairs, immigration, customs, immigration and customs enforcement, and the like. Being targeted to the article on international airports is not the greatest. I think it's fine, for now, but without prejudice to a bold retarget to a more appropriate target. --Doug Mehus T · C  13:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ,, how would you feel about Customs as a potential target? signed,Rosguill talk 21:29, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Glancing at the sections of the article, it does focus on immigration enforcement and customs, import tariffs, and so forth, but it's actually not that great. I'd actually prefer to see Customs move to Customs and immigration, with Customs continuing as a redirect to the section on Customs. Or, instead of a redirect, Customs would then become a dab page for border-related "Customs" and topics related to social and political customs and traditions. Or, alternatively, if editors want to have a separate article on more immigration-related topics, then dab-ifying Customs and immigration. As to the order of the title, in Canada, as well as the United States, "customs" usually comes first and, alphabetically, this seems to make sense. Doug Mehus T · C  21:35, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * two separate things, so WP:XY. We may be lacking an article which describes even in general terms what can be involved in crossing a frontier, with or without goods. I can remember both currency controls on leaving and duty-free goods on reentering UK. (That redirect is very poor. All purchases made outside UK were subject to customs duty, up to a personal limit of something like 200 cigs and a bottle of booze. At one time, there was even a limit on the amount of money you could bring into UK on returning.) Narky Blert (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is history, even recent history, in this. Immigration and customs aren't always about just routinely showing your papers to and opening your suitcase for a couple of bored officials. (1) In 1959, we went on a family holiday to northern Spain. The second or third day there, my father was up early in the morning with a pair of binoculars, birdwatching, when he encountered a policeman. To avoid possible trouble, he volunteered in broken Spanish an explanation of what he was doing; but the policeman just smiled, and said, We know. (2) In 1964, I went on a school trip to Russia. One of my friends had an orange, and the customs officer made him peel it. Why? So that he couldn't sell it on the black market. (3) In 1968, my parents were in Czechoslovakia when the Soviets invaded. They were advised to, and did, leave in a hurry. Neither the Czechoslovak nor the Austrian border guards had the slightest interest in their papers or in what they might be carrying; nor in those of anyone else crossing in the same direction. Narky Blert (talk) 22:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Retarget to Customs which in its lead mentions migration/immigration authorities and has a link to Immigration. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:XY unless a retargeting option is found where this redirect is a proper name of something. Oppose retargeting to Customs or Immigration since redirecting to either one causes the WP:XY issue, since one target is inexplicably preferred over the other in such circumstances. Steel1943  (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Although no action was recommended by the nominator, and I am fine with closing this as no action if the previous participants are as it's not a targeted to a terribly bad location, but it's also not great either. Like Narky and Steel1943, I would be oppose retargeting to Customs or Immigration per the above, and am more or less neutral on deletion. I think, ultimately, what we need here, if action is to occur, is for Customs and immigration to either be converted to either of (1) (a) a disambiguation page or (b) a broad-concept article or, in absence of consensus on how such a page would look, deleted or kept as is without prejudice (as is the case with all deletion discussions) to recreation in the future when suitable alternatives emerge. What do you guys think? Doug Mehus  T · C  15:32, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'd support a WP:BCA, which need only be very short; effectively, an annotated list of targets. I would not support a DAB, because there are no full title matches. Narky Blert (talk) 15:40, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I concur with your arguments re: the partial title matches. Any idea what one might look like? If you get a chance to draft it below the target, we can work on it. I think we should relist this to suss this idea out. Doug Mehus T · C  20:07, 14 February 2020 (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: Involved relist to further evaluate a brief broad-concept article as an alternative to deletion or, as was desired as an alternative by most of the participants in the discussion, to take no action.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doug Mehus T · C  20:08, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * delete (or...) per Steel1943. Plus, the search engine is good enough to find both "Customs" and "Immigration" - Nabla (talk) 11:22, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: I think deleting is still better than "border control" (although it is better than "customs" or "emmigration") - Nabla (talk) 20:20, 4 March 2020 (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: Involved relist to discuss the retarget option identified by feminist, which discusses both customs and immigration broadly speaking. Pinging the previous participants via ping in order to update them on the potential target identified by feminist.
 * Retarget to Border control, which covers both topics. If "customs and immigration" (or "customs, immigration and quarantine") are combined together, they usually refer to the processes in the context of border control. feminist (talk) 09:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Neutral on either delete-ing, per Steel1943 below, or retarget-ing to Border control, per above. It's not necessarily ideal in that I'm not sure that article is appropriately titled, but I would concur that both aspects are broadly discussed. I would add R to related topic, R from synonym (broadly speaking, it is), R for convenience, and any other rcats as may be appropriate. I would also encourage feminist to participate in some other close discussions—their participation is invaluable and welcome! Doug Mehus  T · C  17:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doug Mehus T · C  17:39, 24 February 2020 (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: WP:INVOLVED relist to close oldest log day. Any uninvolved discussion closer can close this at any time.
 * FWIW, I oppose retarget to Border control since there could still be someone looking up this term looking to find specific information about Customs and Immigration combined. Best to just delete this redirect to help readers the most. Steel1943  (talk) 17:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I maintain my support for targeting Border control, because when "customs and immigration" is used as a combined concept it is usually in reference to border control (including at international airports, seaports, train stations etc.). Readers rarely combine the two concepts in any other context. feminist (talk) 02:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Noting 's convincing counter-argument to retargeting to border control, I thought the suggestion was better than any of the other targets identified, but I was never completely satisfied with that target. I now think either retargeting per feminist or deletion per Steel1943 is probably best here, to encourage article, including a broad concept article, creation. What I'm only opposed to is to retargeting to Customs or Immigration. Revised and amended. Doug Mehus  T · C  18:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget border control where readers may find relevant information about customs and immigration being enforced in the same place. Deryck C. 17:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 22:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to say thanks to Feminist for listing this discussion on WP:ANRFC as I was about to do that myself. Steel1943  (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Rome II Conference
<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 Rome II. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 13:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Rome II Conference → Irritable bowel syndrome (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rome_II_Conference&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Not mentioned at target article, delete unless connection to IBS can be provided. Hog Farm (talk) 05:28, 16 February 2020 (UTC) Glades12 (talk) 11:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: These articles may be of interest:
 * Never mind; they are about a seemingly different subject. Glades12 (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2020 (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: To discuss the plausibility of retargeting to the Rome II disambiguation page highlighted by and expanded on by. It would be useful for, as previous participants, to revisit their comments in light of the added comments. In turn, another week will help to develop a more thorough consensus.
 * The Rome II (and later) conferences, part of the Rome process for Functional gastrointestinal disorders (including irritable bowel syndrome), have moved on over the years since 2000. Rome IV is the current version. No need to keep target. Cannot comment on need for disambiguation to any other Rome conferences. Jrfw51 (talk) 11:49, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is no mention of a Rome II conference. However, a Search for "Rome II" alone will lead to an appropriate disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:57, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak retarget to the disambiguation page Rome II. There's context there for the IBS usage, and I added a couple of more speculative uses in the See also. --BDD (talk) 19:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doug Mehus T · C  21:34, 24 February 2020 (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, there isn't anything about conferences at Rome II that would convince me that pointing there is an improvement. signed,Rosguill talk 02:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Functional gastrointestinal disorder. These are a notable series of conferences relating to how to define functional GI disorders. It's a tricky subject and so these conferences have been important in the field as they act to allow some sort of consensus. They are commonly mentioned in textbooks and literature. --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Rome II. Based on convincing comments below I think this is the best option. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Rome II. My first though seeing this listing was as a shorthand for Second Vatican Council, which is listed on that dab page. It's obviously an ambiguous term with usage, so go with disambiguation. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 23:16, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Retarget to the DAB page Rome II as R from incomplete disambiguation. My first thought also was the Second Vatican Council. Narky Blert (talk) 10:03, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Google Generation
<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  . signed,Rosguill talk 18:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Google Generation → Generation Z (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Google_Generation&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Google generation → Generation Z (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Google_generation&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Obscure synonym. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete because apparently, these titles are ambiguous and could also refer to the subject in Generation Alpha. Comment: All sources I found seem to state that the subject of the redirects refers to anyone born on or after 1993, which applies to both part of Generation Z and all of Generation Alpha. Per the fact that the sources also do not seem to mention Generation Z or Generation Alpha, the subject of these redirects seem to be a standalone and possibly notable subject, so deleting these per WP:REDLINK also applies. Steel1943  (talk) 22:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Changed my "delete" to "comment" after finding out that Google generation was formerly an article. In fact, the edit after the aforementioned edit claims that the content of Google generation was merged into Generation Z. Steel1943  (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This title is rather confusing as it can refer to the Millennials, Generation Z, and Generation Alpha, especially the latter two. I entered this phrase into multiple search engines and found that it is not that common a name. Moreover, it can be used to refer to people from multiple demographic cohorts, say 18 to 34, meaning both most the Millennials and the first wave of Generation Z, as in this article. Nerd271 (talk) 20:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I find it telling that "Google" is not mentioned at Millennials, Generation Z, nor Generation Alpha. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Leptosomatidae
<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 withdrawn  . I wanted to allow time for Plantdrew to comment if he wanted to, but especially with the listing period having passed the one-week mark, there's no reason not to prefer the valid nematode article with hatnote. Thanks all! --BDD (talk) 21:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


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

As far as I can tell, this is an erroneous form of the actual bird family, Leptosomidae. Since I had tagged the redirect accordingly, I was pinged by JoergenB on the talk page, who informed me that it was the name of a nematode family. It's listed at List of nematode families, though I would not recommend retargeting there, since no other families do.

However, this has redirected to the cuckoo roller since 2003, and there are reliable sources, like ITIS, that give it for the bird. I'm still leaning towards deletion in the interests of not promulgating the apparent error, but would like others' input. (Pinging my go-to taxonomy expert Plantdrew.) BDD (talk) 21:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for ping. I'm happy to leave it to the experts <b style="font-family:Lucida;color:red">Jimfbleak</b> - talk to me?  06:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I created a stub for it as the nematode family. --awkwafaba (📥) 19:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)


 * keep In my opinion, the stub (although short) is worth to retain (in the hope of some expansion sooner or later, and since it at least has valid sources and a valid taxobox, and a disambiguating hatnote). This would make the RfD moot, wouldn't it? JoergenB (talk) 20:09, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Fooking, Austria
<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 speedy keep  withdrawing nomination per provided justifications signed,Rosguill talk 01:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)


 * <span id="Fooking, Austria">Fooking, Austria → Fucking, Austria (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fooking,_Austria&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification is provided. signed,Rosguill talk 19:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as phonetically plausible – "Fooking" is how an English speaker might write down the name as pronounced in German. – Uanfala (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Uanfala. I don't think misspellings should be mentioned at the target... -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Future of English
<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 all. Ruslik_ Zero 18:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Future of English → English language (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Future_of_English&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Future of Italian → Italian language (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Future_of_Italian&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Future of French → French language (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Future_of_French&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This redirect says almost nothing about English's future (nor its future tense for that matter). The Italian one says literally nothing about it. I would suggest deletion for both. signed,Rosguill talk 19:50, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom. Unlikely search terms, arbitrary targets. –Austronesier (talk) 20:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There's also Future of French, Future of Portuguese language and Future of Portuguese. – Uanfala (talk) 20:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note I've gone ahead and added Future of French for the same reason as the originally nominated redirects. I'm inclined to leave the Portuguese ones alone, if only because there's actually a section discussing projected future trends in the distribution of Portuguese. signed,Rosguill talk 01:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Retarget Future of French to French language, delete others. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 10:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure how I had missed that section for French. I'm fine with keeping that redirect. signed,Rosguill talk 23:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Fwiw, there are corresponding sections for the other languages too: Italian conjugation and Future tense. – Uanfala (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete all as ambiguous. But even if we ignored the meaning intended by their creator and instead decided that they should only refer to the future tense of the respective languages, then they're still problematic. They use one of the many ways of descriptively referring to the topic (Future tense in French, Future in French, French future, etc.), and I see no reason why we should have any of them. We just don't have redirects at such a low level of granularity for individual grammars. – Uanfala (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per Uanfala, more or less. These are too vague to be useful. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of portugese butterflies
<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.  --BDD (talk) 21:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * List of portugese butterflies → List of butterflies of the Iberian Peninsula (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_portugese_butterflies&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Miscapitalised and misspelt word. List of Portuguese butterflies should be created, however, probably. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Portugese india
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Portugese india

Beisebol
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 18%23Beisebol

Arithmetique
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Arithmetique

Barycentriq
<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.  --BDD (talk) 20:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


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

Not even a real spelling of barycentric. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Would only arise as a joke, not even as a plausible typo. ComplexRational (talk) 14:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Arithmetiq
<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. 16:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


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

Not even a real spelling for arithmetic. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Would only arise as a joke, not even as a plausible typo. ComplexRational (talk) 14:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Langue anglaise
<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.  --BDD (talk) 20:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Langue anglaise → English language (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Langue_anglaise&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Langue angloise → English language (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Langue_angloise&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete per WP:FOREIGN, nothing particularly French about English. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RFFL; not to mention the unusual archaism in "angloise". Narky Blert (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FORRED (also known as "WP:RFFL".) Steel1943  (talk) 21:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:19, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – What about anglais? --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 10:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Stabbery (Shrek)
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Stabbery (Shrek)

Northern Ireland women's national under-17 football team
<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.  --BDD (talk) 20:54, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Northern Ireland women's national under-17 football team → Northern Ireland women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northern_Ireland_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Slovenia women's national under-19 football team → Slovenia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Slovenia_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Montenegro women's national under-19 football team → Montenegro women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Montenegro_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bulgaria women's national under-19 football team → Bulgaria women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bulgaria_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Austria women's national under-17 football team → Austria women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Austria_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Georgia women's national under-17 football team → Georgia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgia_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Belarus women's national under-17 football team → Belarus women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belarus_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Iceland women's national under-17 football team → Iceland women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iceland_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Republic of Ireland women's national under-21 football team → Republic of Ireland women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republic_of_Ireland_women%27s_national_under-21_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wales women's national under-17 football team → Wales women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wales_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Faroe Islands women's national under-18 football team → Faroe Islands women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Faroe_Islands_women%27s_national_under-18_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Netherlands women's national under-18 football team → Netherlands women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Netherlands_women%27s_national_under-18_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * England women's national under-18 football team → England women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=England_women%27s_national_under-18_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Norway women's national under-19 football team → Norway women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norway_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Belgium women's national under-19 football team → Belgium women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belgium_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Norway women's national under-17 football team → Norway women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norway_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Macedonia women's national under-17 football team → North Macedonia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Macedonia women's national under-19 football team → North Macedonia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macedonia_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Macedonia women's national under-19 football team → North Macedonia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=North_Macedonia_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Macedonia women's national under-17 football team → North Macedonia women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=North_Macedonia_women%27s_national_under-17_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Wales women's national under-19 football team → Wales women's national football team (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wales_women%27s_national_under-19_football_team&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No mention in the target article. Pelmeen10 (talk) 16:34, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep all These underage teams are clearly related to the senior team. Totally irrelevant if they are not mentioned in main article. Underage teams are not always notable in their own right but they should be linked to parent article. Djln Djln (talk) 16:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think you have misunderstood the purpose of Redirect. Please read it. They are totally different teams from the senior national teams, they are not parent-child articles. It would only make sense if the target article mentions them. If there is no mention, there is no proof they even exist. Similar youth basketball teams were deleted. Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think need to read one section of Redirect: #When should we delete a redirect?.  J  947 &thinsp;(c) , at  18:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, 10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject. Pelmeen10 (talk) 19:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * RHARMFUL says: Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.. For the more recent redirects, K7 cancels out D10.  J 947 &thinsp;(c) , at  20:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Several nominations with identical rationales have been bundled. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete all so long as no mention remains at the target. Someone searching for any of these teams is going to want specific information about that team, and being directed at the senior team where this information cannot be found is doing a disservice to those searchers. Redirects should not be misleading. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Tavix to encourage article creation. Redirects from potentially-notable topics to articles which don't mention them are worse than useless. Narky Blert (talk) 21:37, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete to encourage article creation. GiantSnowman 19:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Espanolo
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Espanolo

Neo Patwa
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 16%23Neo Patwa

Shooting at the 2024 Summer Olympics
<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. 16:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Shooting at the 2024 Summer Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shooting_at_the_2024_Summer_Olympics&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

g2 and this event is a few years out; can be recreated then. Right now exists as a blue link, which leads readers into falsely believing article exists. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:49, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and per WP:CRYSTAL. Write the article when there's something to be said, this redirect implies there's something to be said when as yet there isn't. Narky Blert (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Narky Blert. Speculation that is misleading.&thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 17:05, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Globasa
<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 speedy delete  per G7. -- Tavix  ( talk ) 20:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Globasa → List of constructed languages (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Globasa&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This used to be an article, but it got deleted in January after Articles for deletion/Globasa, and now the page has been resurrected as a redirect to a list that doesn't have any relevant content. The list can't be expanded with an entry for Globasa as it lists only constructed languages with wikipedia articles. – Uanfala (talk) 13:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait – I have planned to add a mention of this wordlang on the target article. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 14:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete – author requests deletion. I realized what to include on the list (I feel uncomfortable that I am killing editors' time). --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 14:20, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Concours D'Elegance
<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 Concours d'Elegance. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 13:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Concours D'Elegance → NCIS: Los Angeles (season 11) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Concours_D%27Elegance&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This is an alternate spelling of Concours d'Elegance, which is about an automobile competition. It is also a trim level of the Cadillac de Ville series automobile. I do not believe anyone would search for the current target, a T.V. episode, but I am not against listing the latter on a dab page of some sort, if that is to be the outcome here. Note: Cadillac Concours redirects to the de Ville article, which mentions the d'Elegance as a trim level of the de Ville Concours model. StonyBrook (talk) 09:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Concours d'Elegance. It's simply a case sensitive search which we should always keep. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 23:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Concours d'Elegance. I'm surprised the redirect didn't already exist given that the obvious target article dates from 2005 and that substituting "D'Elegance" for "d'Elegance" is an easy mistake to make. --kingboyk (talk) 20:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Concours d'Elegance and, if it's really necessary, add a hatnote on that page of the form "For the NCIS episode, see NCIS: Los Angeles (season 11)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guy Harris (talk • contribs)
 * Retarget to Concours d'Elegance and hatnote (can't really see why not; it's the proper name of the episode after all). —&thinsp; J 947  (user &#124; cont &#124; ess), at 00:41, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect per . - St3095  (?)  06:54, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle
<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  . signed,Rosguill talk 08:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * <span id="If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle">If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle → wiktionary:Special:Search/if my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=If_my_aunt_had_balls,_she%27d_be_my_uncle&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Per wi: Do not place it on every possible word. Soft redirects to Wiktionary are to dictionary definitions, and generally Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is not an encyclopedic topic. As page view statistics show, this is not a common search term. feminist (talk) 08:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, not an encyclopedic phrase. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google is your friend. Backstory: this redirect was created after I had introduced the expression into an RFD discussion, and the editor towards whom I'd directed it (currently serving a 3- or 4-month sentence) didn't know it, and it had to be explained. Narky Blert (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per my arguments at "I see, said the blind man". SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

I see, said the blind man
<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.  --BDD (talk) 20:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)


 * <span id="I see, said the blind man">I see, said the blind man → wiktionary:Special:Search/i see, said the blind man (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=I_see,_said_the_blind_man&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Per wi: Do not place it on every possible word. Soft redirects to Wiktionary are to dictionary definitions, and generally Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This is not an encyclopedic topic. As page view statistics show, this is not a common search term. feminist (talk) 08:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. This isn't "every possible word". This is a common English idiom, and it's likely that someone wanting information about it would try searching on Wikipedia rather than Wiktionary; the redirect is helpful in this regard.  Page views are of limited relevance; the item has only existed for two weeks, but it's had several views since the day of and day after its creation.  The redirect template used has four criteria for its use; this redirect clearly satisfies the first three, and as for the fourth—people clearly have searched for it—so while it's early days, I think we can say it's presumptively satisfied as well.  P Aculeius (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google it! we don't need it; along with hundreds or thousands of other idioms with no target in WP. (New pages always get a spike in views on their day of creation, so that's no argument. I've written several articles about seriously uninteresting but worthily encyclopedic topics which got a couple of dozen views within a day of hitting the "Publish" button.) Narky Blert (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't including those views—that's why I said since the day of and the day after. But what kind of an argument is "it doesn't need to redirect to anything because you can Google it"?  What redirects couldn't you apply that argument to?  There are all kinds of redirects between Wikipedia and Wiktionary when one has an article on something and the other doesn't.  Readers turn to Wikimedia projects because they're looking for reliable information, not random contributions by teenagers trying to impress their friends or flame their rivals, or someone just guessing what something is about.  If Wiktionary has an entry on an idiom, and Wikipedia doesn't, but readers who don't know that might try looking it up, then a redirect of this kind is utterly cromulent.  P Aculeius (talk) 02:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not Wiktionary: we do not need a soft redirect to every Wiktionary entry. Template:Soft redirect says Only use it when: There is no scope for a Wikipedia article at this title... and readers search for it on Wikipedia. WP:SOFTSISP recommends using soft redirects when the word/phrase is commonly wikified. This is not commonly wikified, readers do not search for it,  (the spikes at the beginning and end of the timeframe are obviously from NPP and RFD), and it's not obvious that the topic is totally unencyclopedic - there are many legitimate articles in Category:Idioms. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 18:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Windows Express
<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  . signed,Rosguill talk 08:49, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Windows Express → Windows XP (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_Express&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Obscure synonym. Delete. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Nowhere does the Windows XP article suggest that it is also sometimes known as 'Windows Express'; I just Googled it, and all I got was adverts for double glazing companies with that phrase (or a similar one) as their name - seems unrelated. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:script;color:blue;"> (blether)  14:00, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete unused term in the real world. Take out the trash. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That would be the Recycle Bin -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Battles (or Invasion) of Naboo
<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  . signed,Rosguill talk 08:49, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * <span id="The Battles (or Invasion) of Naboo">The Battles (or Invasion) of Naboo → Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Battles_(or_Invasion)_of_Naboo&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Novel and obscure way of referring to a plot element in the movie - 7 pageviews in 2019. This isn't helpful for users. Hog Farm (talk) 04:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Implausible search term combining two alternative names. Narky Blert (talk) 21:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not opposed to deletion, but wanted to note that Naboo would be the more appropriate target, probably tagged as an avoided double redirect from Battle of Naboo. --22:19, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

R2-A6
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 15%23R2-A6

'Gnostic'
<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  . signed,Rosguill talk 08:49, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * 'Gnostic' → Gnosticism (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%27Gnostic%27&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The quotation marks around this term make it a very unlikely search term, nobody's gonna search for terms within single quotes. Hog Farm (talk) 04:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * - the redirect from Gnostic already exists, so perhaps 'Gnostic' can be deleted - Epinoia (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Redirects in either single or double quotes are unnecessary clutter; except in the very rare cases where an official title is enclosed in quotation marks. Narky Blert (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 'Delete'. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.