Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13

May 13
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 13, 2024.

Stars and planetary systems in fiction
 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 * Pppery * it has begun... 16:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Stars and planetary systems in fiction → Extrasolar planets in fiction (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete per WP:XY per the rationale at Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 3. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Would it be feasible to create a dab at this title? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Long standing title. Keep as or at worst, dabify. —Kusma (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This is an R from move - from what I can see, the page now at Extrasolar planets in fiction was at this title from its creation in August 2006 until less than a week ago. Because of this, I'd be very wary of supporting this redirect's deletion (per WP:R); however, given the WP:XY issues, I'm currently leaning in favour of turning this title into a disambiguation page pointing to both articles. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten [  meow ] 20:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep as an R from move; see WP:LINKROT. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per the other comments. It looks like there is too much traffic at this time to consider deleting this link.  Perhaps a ways down the road, the traffic will stop and this can be renominated. -2pou (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment The first step either way should be to convert incoming links to point to Extrasolar planets in fiction (the less ambiguous title) if that was the intended target, or to Stars in fiction, and, if links specifically pointing to the WP:XY title remain (e.g., intended to link more generally to fictional systems of star+planets), we can see if there are enough to warrant either a disambiguation page or a section in one of the two articles. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 11:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * All links in mainspace and templates have already been taken care of. TompaDompa (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * So all the traffic is from external websites? In this case I'm guessing it was intended to point to Extrasolar planets in fiction, so keep per above to avoid linkrot. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 23:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep to preserve page history. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 17:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep I guess. What is the other article(s) that this would point to? Herostratus (talk) 01:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Category:Television series by CBS Television Studios
 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  .  ✗  plicit  00:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * [[Category:Television series by CBS Television Studios]] → Category:Television series by CBS Studios (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

A category redirect created by an indefinitely-blocked user which should be eligible for WP:G5 but I tagged this as a WP:C1, which reverted and suggested I list this here for deletion. This category is like other cats moved to newer/later titles without rdr by JJMC89 bot III. Intrisit (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - There's not really any harm in it, and it could help if someone adds the category—the category redirect function will fix it automatically—but I don't think it will be added anymore (4 years after rebrand now), and the category renaming procedure typically does not leave behind a redirect as the nom states. -2pou (talk) 01:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

East Midlands Mainline
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 Midland Main Line. Consensus (and logic) appears to be on the side of this retargetting. Black Kite (talk) 10:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * East Midlands Mainline → East Midlands Trains (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Not sure why this redirect even exists. Could also be (re)targeted to Midland Main Line (preferred) or east Midlands Railway JuniperChill (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * I expect that this redirect exists because (according to the article) East Midlands Trains ran services called "Mainline". I do not know whether they were ever called "East Midlands Mainline" by anyone, but it would not surprise me too much. —Kusma (talk) 20:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Further thoughts on retargeting to Midland Main Line? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 22:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * East Midlands Mainline may not be common, but It's not hard to find examples, often in the same item that also calls it Midland Mainline.
 * Council urges electrification of East Midlands Mainline
 * an interchange station with the East Midlands Mainline is to be located
 * East Midlands Mainline commuters were told back in 2017
 * Find us ... Leicester is on the East Midlands Mainline route
 * three sections of fibre running alongside the railway, each connected to a FOAS interrogator. These cover a section of the East Midlands mainline from (at )
 * this contemporary station stands as a pivotal piece of the city's infrastructure, strategically positioned on the East Midlands Mainline
 * NebY (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * [nom comment]Redirect to Midland Main Line then]] JuniperChill (talk) 17:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep because plausible alternative name per NebY Okmrman (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Midland Main Line. Finally checking the 6 examples I offered above, #1-4 & 6 are about the Midland Main Line (#5 is about the Birmingham–Peterborough line). Though at present East Midlands Trains are a train operating company on the Midland Mail Line, that may not last, so they're a bad target. NebY (talk) 18:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Disambiguate or Redirect to Midland Main Line, on the one hand EMT did have a service known as "Mainline", but according to the article only lasted a few months. While "Main Line" railways are also termed "Mainlines" and the Midland Main Line goes through the East Midlands, so there is possible confusion. As well as being confused for Midland Mainline which operated in the East Midlands, so possible DAB. However, as those companies no longer exist, while the railway line is still operating, once can assume most readers are looking for the existing line, so open to redirecting to Midlands Main Line too.  Dank Jae  19:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Universal Monsters Shared Universe
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...  16:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Universal Monsters Shared Universe → Universal Classic Monsters (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

A "shared universe" is never discussed at the target article, and is only mentioned within one of the external links. In my opinion this is not currently a likely or helpful redirect in the article's current form, as there is no substantial coverage of a shared universe. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a plausible search term. And honestly the only reason shared universe isn't mentioned is because so much material that used to be in the article has been deleted a few years ago in a controversial rewrite.★Trekker (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay  💬 21:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. The controversial edit by Trekker is referring to my own re-write. On trying to organize the films as a whole proved to be fruitless. Namely they don't cross-over until late into the end of the series and there is no rush to lump them all together as a series until they were marketed on home video. They don't narratively connect (and even when they attempt to, it is very loose). As there won't be any mention of how these films connect in that article currently, I'd suggest we remove the re-direct. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: I've recently re-vamped the content to show where the Universal Monsters connect with sources that deal with this specifically. That said, the term "Univerasl Monsters Shared Universe" was not a term I came across and suggesting they are all within the same universe is not really explicitly the case and the this specific term is not mentioned in the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment The target article previously included content regarding Universal Pictures' cancelled "Dark Universe", which maps more closely to current use of "shared universe". That content is still present at The_Mummy_(2017_film).
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Kingofthepirates.com
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 One Piece (1999 TV series). (non-admin closure) Ca <sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">talk to me!  14:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Kingofthepirates.com → One Piece (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Dead website that was probably fanmade as well. Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 07:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete probably not even worth a redirect when alive. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It was not a fansite. It was 4Kids Entertainment's official One Piece site (the privacy policy goes to 4Kids) https://web.archive.org/web/20051001030033/http://kingofthepirates.com/
 * would this change if it was revealed that this was 4Kids' One Piece site?
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That's... really weird. I mean, maybe it would have changed my mind were it up any time in the past decade-and-a-half but now it's the kind of obscure trivia that's just irrelevant. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I created the redirect in 2009, when the 4Kids dub was only a few years old. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Mention added to One Piece (1999 TV series). Delete or retarget? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have added the webarchive link to the External links section. Jay  💬 13:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget to One Piece (1999 TV series), which is what the website was about. Jay's external link has since been moved there from One Piece. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 15:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget to One Piece (1999 TV series) WhisperToMe (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget  to One Piece (1999 TV series) since mention was added to said page. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:40, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete One entry in an external links section is not sufficient substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 16:07, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Genie (feral child and etc.
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  . While both sides made valid arguments (keep arguments noting that these do see use and thus can be considered useful, delete arguments noting that Wikipedia's software makes it such that at most readers following the broken link will be asked to make one further click to reach the same destination), deletion has a sizable advantage in terms of numerical support. signed,Rosguill talk 17:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


 * <span id="Genie (feral child">Genie (feral child → Genie (feral child) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Kuru (disease">Kuru (disease → Kuru (disease) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="USS Pueblo (AGER-2">USS Pueblo (AGER-2 → USS Pueblo (AGER-2) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Flow (psychology">Flow (psychology → Flow (psychology) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="List of countries by GDP (PPP">List of countries by GDP (PPP → List of countries by GDP (PPP) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Rectifier (neural networks">Rectifier (neural networks → Rectifier (neural networks) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Address (geography">Address (geography → Address (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="E (mathematical constant">E (mathematical constant → E (mathematical constant) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="My Way (2011 film">My Way (2011 film → My Way (2011 film) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Glob (programming">Glob (programming → Glob (programming) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Davy Crockett (nuclear device">Davy Crockett (nuclear device → Davy Crockett (nuclear device) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Easter egg (media">Easter egg (media → Easter egg (media) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Well, in for a penny, in for a pound... this nomination consists of every remaining redirect with unclosed parenthesis, of which there are now only twelve. All of these typos are not plausible to intentionally make on their own. Because there's been cumulatively 1000+ or so of these redirect types deleted over the last few months, this nomination seeks to determine whether there's a threshold that makes these redirects acceptable, or if one even exists. Most of these redirects have come to exist through erroneous links, which are updateable. While it's good to have redirects from common misspellings lying around for ease of navigation on Wikipedia, the presence of implausible redirect errors sets unreasonable expectations and portrays the faulty notion to readers that "infinite typo variations are encouraged, regardless of likelihood", when this is not currently the case. For the most part, spelling variations are accepted in redirects; especially with words that are tricky to spell, having a set of titles with minor differences can be useful to capture likely, intentional errors. When it pertains to disambiguation, though, there will never be a time where errors in the act of disambiguation are expected, for any title. While someone might spell a title like Hampster with an intentional (but incorrect) "P", one can generally have 100% confidence that a title with a left parenthesis will contain a right parenthesis, and, as an extension, typing in a title that doesn't contain a right parenthesis will have a 0% likelihood of being redirected to the correct title, as it will never be correctly expected. The disambiguator is Wikipedia's "official insertion" onto the title based on other article names that co-exist here. The tagline's format can be safely assumed as error-free, or if there is an error in the disambiguation, that it will be corrected ASAP without hesitation. Being locked into keeping tabs on any and all errors within this "topic title guarantee" inherited from Wikipedia disambiguation precedent, just because of one (or twelve remaining) bad links on the internet, is just not worth for titles that are one punctuation mark away from the correctness that was already assumed beforehand. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all. When typing in to the search bar, the search result will be autocompleted with the missing parentheses. As for websites that cannot handle parentheses, that is, as has been established quite clearly over the last few months, their problem, and not Wikipedia's-- they need to fix their formatting handling. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all - Note that I !voted delete on the last batch you nominated. This batch I'm !voting keep for the simple reason that they are demonstrably useful to someone... in that these redirects are all getting use (noting again that this is unlike the last batch).  They're WP:CHEAP, they're useful, they're harmless.  Note that I expressly do NOT support the creation of more of these things, for all the reasons cited by nom, but I don't think we should deliberately go out of our way to break someone's workflow just because it makes our database tidier.  If, at some point in the future, these stop getting regular use for an extended period of time, I'd be happy to see them gone.  But for now, they get use, they're unambiguous, they should stay. (No offense to nom, by the way, I appreciate getting community input on where the limits are / should be) Fieari (talk) 07:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all per Fieari. Deletion would inconvenience readers without brining any benefits to anybody. Thryduulf (talk) 10:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all as unnecessary. One parenthesis missing does not justify these redirects when the search function automatically fills in the desired results for anyone searching for them. These are just pointless redirects. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all per Fieari and Thryduulf, and the previous discussions. Genie (feral child has gone down in use since the prior discussions except that it got over 6,500 hits on March 29, more than some articles get in a year. It's clearly still useful; Wikipedia's mission is to provide information to its readers, not to break things and hope that an external website notices (they won't). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:UNNATURAL typos. The search box fills in the parentheses for you, I doubt anyone is going to type an opening parenthesis, forget to close it, and then hit enter without selecting the correct option from search. As for other websites, that's their problem. <span style="background-color: rgb(240, 233, 205); padding: 3px"><span style="color: rgb(237, 50, 45);">StreetcarEnjoyer <span style="color: rgb(237, 50, 45);">(talk)  18:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * These redirects are not typos for the benefit of people already on Wikipedia, but people navigating to Wikipedia from external sites. Many sites most prominently Reddit, have an issue where the trailing parenthesis is cut off in URLs without some HTML wizardry. The site "forces" users to make these "typos" when you just copy the link sometimes. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all I think my past self would have (and did) support deleting these. But we come down to yet another delete these convention failing to uphold a challenge on its merits, and so it goes. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 22:21, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 22:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom and WP:RDAB due to the missing end parentheses. Also, delete per precedence set at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27 and Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 14. Steel1943  (talk) 14:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all — the assertion in the description "Most of these redirects have come to exist through erroneous links, which are updateable." is vague and misleading: it hides the useful truth which is that "At least some of these links are NOT updateable.", for example in IRC chat logs (e.g. for "Address (geography"). Agreed with prior Keep all arguments that a small handful of such redirects are WP:CHEAP. The net-net here is that a small handful are providing more utility (fixing unchangeable slightly erroneous links to Wikipedia, for a smoother Wikipedia experience) than cost. That's also a reasonable standard to apply for future such exceptions (source of link is apparently unchangeable). The arguments for Delete all appear to mostly be forms of the "Perfect is the enemy of good" problem. Tantek (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * All links are updateable, through either direct editing, or replacement if locked. The notice that appears on every page saying "did you mean to close your parentheses" would not discourage readers from reaching their destination being just a click away, and encourages the phasing-out of any erroneous links. "Perfect is the enemy of good" does not seem to be accurate when we aren't dealing with an out-of-reach concept of totality; there's no 80-20 about it. This the entire set of titles that are out of alignment with redirect fundamentals, and the problem can be solved with just this RfD. The lack of these redirects will not prevent anyone beyond finding it gone a single time, and immediately finding a new solution in seconds, whether it comes from adding a parentheses to their search term or url, or adding it to the link itself if handy, or generating one's own link. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all if you are going to rescue typos by redirection then why stop with close parenthese. Why not redirect E Mathematical Contant and Genie (ferral child) OrewaTel (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom and RDAB, and also per precedence of previous discussions. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 02:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all - per all above, also a) Aren't these only "getting used" because as people type in names, the auto-fill starts listing results and as they get to the end of the name, but before they type in the closing parathesis, the redirect without one populates to the bottom of the auto-fill box making it most obvious and easy to click on,(but at that point, the correct, full name is right there at the top of the results as well). b) It doesn't seem anyone wants to see more of these types of redirects created, so wouldn't deleting help with that? (There are people who literally spend all their time looking for pages to create, and having redirects like this to obstensibly compensate for typos in page names will just encourage the creation of more.) Their usage is a false positive, they don't really assist with anything, removing them will not hamper anyone's ability to search, and if we don't want these types of redirects, then we shouldn't be making a special exception to this group just because they exist. (jmho) - w o lf  04:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all based on the fact there are legitimate reasons why people might be visiting these redirects other than simply typos. For example, in Markdown, unescaped right parentheses are interpreted as the end of a URL, so often times when people link these Wikipedia pages in Reddit comments, people will be directed to these sorts of titles. In addition, of course redirects are cheap. --Habst (talk) 16:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete all These redirects are explicitly discouraged and would fall under WP:R3 if created today. There is precedent for deleting them, and keeping them would have WP:PANDORA issues. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * delete all per all the other times those redirects with missing parentheses got deleted  cogsan (nag me  (stalk me 18:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all. Redirects are WP:CHEAP, and these are all likely from external links on sites such as Reddit and are absolutely pointed at the correct targets. These also all appear to be popular enough to get regular use about 5 users a day or so. Genie especially is frequently posted and can get very high daily page views (e.g. 6k a few weeks ago). It does Wikipedia no good to delete it or to force them to make an additional click. Arguments to delete because no one is going to forget typing the closing parentheses or because of auto-fill should be ignored, as the use case for this is almost exclusively linking from external sites. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Here is an example of the formatting issues with Reddit's Markdown language for its posts that is the primary reason for these redirects existing in the first place: . Very few people are using these links deliberately. They are being forced to, and we should've deliberately inconvenience readers because of minor stylistic issues. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * We shouldn't be responsible for creating redirects accounting for bugs in other platform's errors. A bug that has been fixed years ago, from the looks of it, being fixed well before the reddit post was made, as implied. People using old reddit are doing so knowing full well its limitations. So now there's zero surprise that a parenthesis could go missing at the end of a URL, as it's been long-since documented and understood, apparently. The solution is not "allow infinite redirects with botched-up disambiguation because old-reddit users might run into a broken link here and there, despite it being fixed for many years but refuse to upgrade to avoid it"; or, we can stop supporting "Foo (bar" titles due to the pollution it causes on our end, allowing implausible misnomers among redirects, splitting histories and causing messes and clutter that can be simply avoided. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * (Also in response to the reddit poster's query linked, I tried the second hyperlink on both old and new reddit and it seems to be working fine for me; I'm getting to Paris (surname) both ways.) Utopes (talk / cont) 20:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * i hear the error (whatever it actually is) was fixed ages ago  cogsan (nag me)  (stalk me) 22:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, it does not work for me in Old Reddit either on PC or mobile, with or without RES. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Reddit is an absolutely massive website with hundreds of millions of users, so even a small percentage of Old Reddit users represents a significant population. Old Reddit users aren't people who just forgot to upgrade or something, there are real downsides to New Reddit (mainly ads-related) that lead them to opt out. A bug being documented is not equal to the bug being understood and 100% of end users having the technical know-how to avoid it. While not a scientific survey of any sort, anecdotal open-source evidence seems to show that approximately 5% of Reddit users seem to use the older version.
 * No one is saying that we should enthusiastically encourage or go out of our way to create a duplicate redirect for each page with a parenthetical disambiguator. But for ones that did get created, someone found them WP:USEFUL and where we have proof that they do get use as is the case here, which are two reasons explicitly listed as the #4 and 5reasons not to delete redirects at WP:R, where's the harm in keep them? Far more editor time has been wasted trying to delete these than has ever been spent on creating them in the first place. These titles are not misnomers, with only a clear typographical difference and the page histories are usually extremely short. Many of these have also stood a decade or more without any serious issues. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete all These are pointless, as people are unlikely to be typing in the full disambiguation anyway. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Vote changed to delete all, since, as pointed out (below), our software already handles this automatically, so there is no need for creating or maintaining such links manually. Gawaon (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all per WP:CHEAP. Would I have created these redirects myself? Possibly not. Do they do any harm to the encylopedia and/or readers by existing? Also no - as far as I can see, they are practically harmless. I'm not seeing how these types of redirect are problematic enough to warrant deletion, and deletion may well do harm by breaking external links (WP:R). To answer Utopes' point above, we're not responsible for creating these sorts of redirects for every title that exists, but I don't see how deleting the ones that do get created benefits the project. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 13:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all. These are exemplar cases of WP:RDAB. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Out of curiosity are any of the other examples at RDAB the result of programming error? -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but arguably Wikipedia isn't here to provide redirects to get around everyone else's bugs. (And anyway ... in old Reddit a redirect that misses the trailing parenthesis gets you to, for example, Harris (surname. The first thing at that page and many others is "Did you mean: Harris (surname)?". We simply don't need these redirects, and already have a useful essay which lists the kind of redirects we don't need. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Final relist, noting the nomination has been open for over five weeks, as consensus has yet to precipitate. Keep or delete? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Steel1943 (edit: maybe we should make a new CSD for this) JoshuaAuble (talk) (edits) 22:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete all per Lunamann and Steel1943. <span style="color:#f80;background:linear-gradient(45deg,#001,#004);font-family:'Courier New',monospace">mwwv <span style="font-size:8px;color:#f80;font-family:'Courier New',monospace">(converse) 14:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per WP:RDAB and Steel1943. These are not only unhelpful as a link but also unnecessary as a search term as the valid title exists and will autocomplete anyways. Gonnym (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep all; deletion would be actively harmful by forcing thousands a month to make one more click, with only the most trivial gain of cleanliness on our part. I am unsure why half the comments in favour of deletion appear to presuppose the falsehood that readers are accessing these redirects by searching these titles. All it takes is 10 seconds to check the rationale for these redirects' existence, which is incidentally why the PANDORA argument of mindless copying of redirect formats has never ever panned out in reality – the most trivial investigation on the part of the mythical editor-in-search-of-redirects-to-create would demonstrate why creation of these is unnecessary.  J 947  ‡ edits 05:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per nom, & errors on a user's part can be easily fixed by just adding a closing parenthesis in the next edit. (I myself have made this very mistake.) The Sharpest Lives (the deadliest to lead) 18:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Shhhnotsoloud. The redirects are textbook RDAB and if anyone gets to them from another site they can click the handy "Did you mean x" link. We don't need to accomodate the bad code others have written more than we already do. Nickps (talk) 23:51, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all: per nom. These are all unnecessary as autocomplete will suggest the correct search term. <b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b><b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b> 01:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. Harmless at worst, useful at best. -- Tavix ( talk ) 02:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

TotalMedia Theatre
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  . Mention is added, discussion of whether it is WP:DUE can happen in the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ca <sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">talk to me!  06:17, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Arcsoft TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * ArcSoft TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No mention of TotalMedia or TotalMedia Theatre at the target article. This is not a helpful redirect as there is no content about this subtopic, and the stub for ArcSoft does not help enlighten readers here. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of Arcsoft TotalMedia Theatre? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  06:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * As part of, had enhanced the target and added the products, including the one under discussion.  Jay  💬 14:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep all since they're now mentioned at the current target. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 07:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all the list ArcSoft is inherently promotional cruft and should be removed. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 19:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Mentions added to target. Keep or delete? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all per PPP Okmrman (talk) 03:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per CycloneYoris JoshuaAuble (talk) 01:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

⇢
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun...  16:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * <span id="⇢">⇢ → Arrow (symbol) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This refers to birational maps. Right now the target article has a hatnote for three of the arrows redirecting there, but I'm not sure expanding that indefinitely would be the best option. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Retarget to Birational geometry or the more general Rational mapping (which also uses either this or the similar notation ⤏), someone copy-pasting this specific symbol is much more likely to look for what it means than for a generic "arrow symbol" page. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 14:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep / refine to the "Usage" section and mentioned dashed arrows there. They also occur in sequence diagrams and various other places including commutative diagrams. —Kusma (talk) 20:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Ancient United States
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 History of the United States. (non-admin closure)  <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 03:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Ancient United States → Pre-Columbian era (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

It's a bad redirect, folks. Remsense 诉  08:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Why? Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 08:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete, the United States weren't a thing in the pre-Columbian era for obvious reasons. A retarget to History of the United States (which does mention the pre-Columbian history, but makes it clear the US didn't exist back then, calling it the lands that became the United States) would also be an option. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 12:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Immediately  I wish I could be more civil but there is no better way to put in back in 2006-2009 I was a toxic cunt, how I didn't get banned back then is a mystery to me. There are far too many pointless redirects I made back then some people aren't even aware of. That's the main reason I want ALL my editing history gone and start entirely from scratch. And even after recovering I doubt my stance will change. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 14:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Retarget to History of the United States - while it may not be an ideal title, the fact of the matter is that if someone is looking for information from the ancient period on the landmass known as the United States, this article is where it is. If they're looking for information on the country from the ancient period, well then they might just learn something. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Good point indeed! I'm honestly split between retarget and delete on this one, both are fine with me. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 14:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget to History of the United States per Ivanvector. Deletion doesn't seem helpful, since we have relevant content and it's a plausible search term. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget per Ivanvector. The new target is more geographically specific than the current, and is more similar to the target of Ancient Germany. –<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b> ( d c̄ ) 16:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.  thetechie@enwiki  :  ~/talk/  $  17:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Retarget to History of the United States per Ivanvector. Not exactly the best fit but I agree that this is the closest target for it. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 02:25, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nomination. Ancient United States simply isn't a thing that existed. <b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b><b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b> 10:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete! Ancient United States implies that there was a giant united empire in North America at the time, which clearly didn't happen. Okmrman (talk) 04:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: I don't mind retargeting, but in this case I lean toward deletion because this redirect has received 0 page views from before this nomination. Had it actually been used more often than never at all, I would change my mind about it appearing to be an unlikely search term. If it were to be retargeted though, I would prefer History of the United States. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 21:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep or retarget. The vast majority of values of X in articles and redirects titled Ancient X didn't exist in ancient times. So until we delete Ancient France and move Ancient Egypt to The Two Lands, that's not a very good argument. I actually prefer the current target—history of the United States only briefly covers the periods that, elsewhere in the world, are called "ancient", whilst Pre-Columbian era covers them in depth—but that's not so important. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Retarget to History of the United States for the reasons given by Ivanvector. --Bsherr (talk) 14:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget per Ivanvector. Definitely seems like this is the domain of a WP:Bartender, given consensus is very clearly at "we can't stay here". (So would this, then, be a bar...?) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Sucking peepee
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 ) 02:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Sucking peepee → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Peepee sucking → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats)

I think the title makes it obvious why. Yes, it's technically pointing to the correct page, but seriously. I doubt "Sucking peepee" is really an encyclopedic redirect to have. Chaotıċ Enby  (talk · contribs) 23:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Keep or delete? (I count 9 deletes and 4 keeps.) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 07:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - Redirects are allowed to be "unencyclopedic". This is an unambiguous redirect, so it's valid. Fieari (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete – Being a comprehensible synonym isn't sufficient grounds to include an expression. Yes, redirects are cheap—very cheap—but that doesn't mean we need to go Full Neelix and include every possible comprehensible synonym that no one would ever use. If there are actually instances of people searching for this, I'd be fine with it; but are there? Google Trends says no. (That one spike today is me just checking.) Please delete this, before someone decides that if this works, then so does hoovering hoohaa, lapping labia, tonguing twat, and savoring snatch, none of which are on Google Trends. (Actually, I didn't bother to check; but wouldn't it be something if one of them *is* on Trends, whereas sucking peepee is not? Then what are we gonna do?) Mathglot (talk) 05:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and Mathglot. Can successfully get to this target from a plethora of different searches, including but not limited to, Google. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Unlikely/unhelpful search terms. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * torn between voting to delete based on "peepee" being a general term for the thing that expels the bladder juice (i'm sure there's a better term for that), and to keep based on it being funnyultimately though, i'd say retarget them to sexual intercourse or a more general target. can't check for a specific target at the moment, my isp would have me killed within the next 3 hours  cogsan (nag me)  (stalk me) 17:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Utopes. Jay  💬 18:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Mathglot; we don't need redirects for every euphemism people might invent. And when it comes to sex acts, there are a lot. Crossroads -talk- 23:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CHEAP and as plausible search terms, and tag with R from colloquial name. To respond to concerns in the nomination, redirects are allowed to be unencyclopedic - I’m not aware of a policy/guideline that disallows such redirects, and WP:RNEUTRAL states that perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. Arguments have been made above regarding the likelihood of these as search terms — however, "sucking+peepee" tells me that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet, and these therefore strike me as plausible search terms (engaging WP:R). The question I’m asking myself is ‘could these redirects potentially refer to articles besides the current target?’ - and, from what I can see, they seem fairly unambiguous.Would I have created these redirects myself? Probably not. However, are they problematic such that they require deletion? My answer to that question is no — and therefore, my !vote is to keep: just because Wikipedia doesn’t need these redirects doesn’t mean that the project and/or readers are harmed by their existence. To respond to Mathglot’s and Crossroads' concerns regarding potential other redirects being created, pandora’s-box-style arguments are a form of WP:OTHERSTUFF: if such redirects are created, they can be judged on their own merits (including deletion per WP:R if a novel or very obscure term without a mention in the article) - and the currently nominated redirects should be judged on their own merits likewise. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 10:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If your argument is based on a google search telling you that "that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet" I would have to respond, "Do you have any idea how small a number 49 results is on the entire internet?" That is functionally equivalent to zero. Some statistician among us might estimate the number of unique English bigrams on the internet with over 49 hits, and that number would be enormous, but they don't all rate redirects, only the ones searched for possibly do. There is no evidence that anybody searched for this bigram (at least, before this thread was started). Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If it would help, I could link individual pages which use this term. In my mind, the question is whether or not this is a novel or very obscure phrase, and - based on the usage I found from the search - my opinion is that it doesn’t meet that bar. (As a side note, I’m unsure where 49 results originates from - for me, the search returns ~1,700.) Given the size of the internet, lots of terms could be said to have a usage functionally equivalent to zero; however, if a redirect from such a term would potentially be helpful, and its existence wouldn’t be problematic, I don’t see why it couldn’t exist - just because a phrase is insignificant compared to the internet as a whole, doesn’t necessarily mean that that phrase is novel or very obscure. While evidence of usage can be a factor in favour of keeping, a lack of usage is not a reason to delete a redirect. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 10:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - per R from colloquial name.See Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_25 GobsPint (talk) 22:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * And you voted 'Keep' there, per... this discussion. Hmm. Mathglot (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - if a reader wants information on these topics, the current target is where they will find it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:58, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete – an Unlikely and unhelpful search terms. Drdpw (talk) 18:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Useless. Wikipedia is not a profanity de-censorer. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 18:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: One more try… Delete or keep? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: per Mathglot. What next? Tongue poking the one eyed snake? Does every possibility need to exist regardless of whether it is likely or helpful? <b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b><b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b> 07:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete as per arguments already put forward above, and also anyone who actually searches for this term is likely to be a child. Plenty of other redirects lead to fellatio (65 in total) and as far as I can see none of them are as juvenile (with the possible exception of cockgobbling) and unlikely to be searched. Obviously, juvenile content is allowed on Wikipedia but together with the rest of the arguments put forward is it really necessary in this case? Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 12:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Couldn't English learners also search for this term? Air on White (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I am a language learner. When learning Dutch, I learnt the word "penis" (admittedly I could have taken a guess at that one) long before the colloquial "lul". In Swedish I know the word "manslem", and in Spanish "pene" but don't know any other ways of saying penis in either language. Maybe I'm an oddity, but in my experience language learners learn the actual word first and then the colloquialisms. I'm sure language learners are more likely to use the word "penis" as it's the same in Dutch, German, French (with an accent), Swedish, Portuguese (with an accent), Danish, Bosnian, Norwegian, Turkish and Latin, I'm sure amongst others. The point is, I don't think the argument that maybe English learners will use a relatively obscure euphamism for male genitalia holds up under scrutiny. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 18:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete, not because it is particularly bad, but to avoid a repeat of the WP:X1 Neelix issues, even if those were more prominently about breasts. —Kusma (talk) 12:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kusma: Forgive me for asking this, but isn't this just WP:OTHERSTUFF? If this redirect isn't particularly bad, I don't see why it should be deleted based on the idea that other redirects might be created - if they are, RfD can deal with them as/when they occur. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 15:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you want a policy, it is Wikipedia is not a dictionary, especially not a slang dictionary. We even have WP:NOTURBANDICT as a shortcut to that page. Ignoring this just leads to . —Kusma (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My reading of WP:NOTDICT is that it applies to the content of articles rather than redirects, and so would be applicable if e.g. someone wrote a dictionary-definition article on a slang term (which is where Wikipedia is not a...slang...guide would apply). However, per WP:R, redirects from plausible search terms for article subjects are allowed - redirects existing from colloquial terms doesn't violate NOTDICT by my understanding. Best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 20:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Despite how silly these redirects seem, they are still plausible search terms. Google shows 1,700 results for the exact phrase "sucking peepee." Meanwhile, the alternate spelling "sucking pp," which does not yet have a page, records 11,100 results. The arguments that "sucking peepee" is an unlikely search terms are speculative, as these two were nominated for deletion within an hour of being created, leaving no time to collect pageview data. The likelihood of a redirect being useful should correspond with how often it is viewed, after all. Why not just keep these new redirects? There's no harm. If they truly are useless, we can always RfD again. Air on White (talk) 06:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * I don't even know how long the discussion will last. I'm gonna vote weak keep because it's a colloquial term among people talking about sex privately. Ahri.boy (talk) 07:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ahri.boy: When voting, please add a reason for why you're voting the way you are, as we're not simply counting votes. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Shuggie
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 disambiguate  .  Jay  💬 06:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Shuggie → Hugh (given name) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No mention of "Shuggie" as a nickname at the target article. Could also be confused with Shruggie. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate. Shuggie and Shug are Scottish diminutives of Hugh, but we can't forget about Shuggie Otis. - Eureka Lott 05:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep as noted, Shug and Shuggie are Scottish nicknames for Hugh. I don't see the need for a disambiguation page though, perhaps add Shuggie Otis to the Hugh article instead. I've already added Shuggie to the infobox as a nickname. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 12:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is not the Scots Wikipedia, and "shuggie" could be confused with a diminutive form of "sugar". Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ivanvector Just to note, Scots is a distinct language. Scottish English is a recognised variant of English. We use American English, British English, Indian English, Canadian English, Australian English, South African English, etc. as appropriate on the English language Wikipedia. I don't think that Scottish English should be ignored and relegated to the edition of Wikipedia in another language. See MOS:ENGVAR, "The English Wikipedia prefers no national variety over others." This isn't to say this particular redirect should be emphatically retained (I've indicated my preference above), just that the use of a nickname (or word in general) predominantly or exclusively in Scotland doesn't automatically mean it's a Scots word. I don't speak Scots, aside from some vocabulary which has made its way into Scottish English, but I do use "Shug" and, to a lesser extent, "Shuggie" as a nickname for people called Hugh. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 14:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's hard to see how someone imagining "shuggie" to be a diminutive form of "sugar" (!) will be helped by deleting Wikipedia's redirect to the actual Scottish English usage. NebY (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Shuggie Otis describes the nickname: "short for 'sugar', according to his mother", and also see wikt:shug. Fair point about Scottish English vs the Scots language, I'm just not sure that this is the best usage for this redirect. Besides Shuggie Otis there's also Shuggie Bain; only one of those is about a person named Hugh. I feel like search results would be better. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate - When I see arguments in an RfD about what the best target should be, it often (not always) means that the disambiguation option should be seriously considered. This is one of those cases, it looks like to me.  Fieari (talk) 00:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Disambiguate by creating given name SIA: draft provided. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate per above, using the draft that was created there. <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 04:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Drove
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 disambiguate  . (non-admin closure)  <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 03:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Drove → Drovers' road (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Yet another confusing vocabulary word redirect, since "drove" is also the past tense of "drive". I suggest either disambiguating between driving and drovers' road or retargeting to wiktionary. Duckmather (talk) 03:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I think your first suggestion sounds good. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, the past tense of a verb isn't necessarily a good target when the word is also a noun. A hatnote to driving should do the job, no need for a standalone disambiguation page to maintain. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 12:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment in my area of Scotland there are a few rights of way named Drove Road, rather than Drovers' road, so a redirect from Drove road might be appropriate, but as noted drove has multiple meanings and I'm not sure this is the most appropriate target. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 12:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - neat, I'd never heard that term before, but the target is unquestionably correct. A hatnote would solve the ambiguity. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Dabify with the above entries plus the following: Drove chisel and Drove, a group of hares. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'm fine with dabbing - and thanks for the findings! Duckmather (talk) 04:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Keep or dabify? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Dabify per lent Okmrman (talk) 19:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Disambiguate, per those above. I have added the disambiguation text under the redirect. BD2412  T 17:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * DABify per above. The proposed DAB looks fine for now, might also want to add a wiktionary cross-wiki link to it as well. Fieari (talk) 04:13, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Anonima italiana petroli
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  . (non-admin closure)  <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 03:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Anonima italiana petroli → Gruppo API (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

delete: the correct name of the company is Anonima Petroli Italiana (API), what can be found on the Internet about Anonima Italiana Petroli (AIP?) concerns other companies (for example in one book he talks about Anonima Italiana Petroli of Piacenza, another says that it subsequently became Società Petrolifera Italiana...). InterComMan (talk) 11:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting for further input. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color:blue; text-shadow:cyan 0.0em 0.0em 0.1em;">CycloneYoris</b> <b style="color:purple">talk!</b> 19:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, from the first sentence in the article "Italiana Petroli S.p.A. (until 2019 Anonima Petroli Italiana S.p.A.), also known by the acronym API or Gruppo API" - it would appear their name has changed but their acronym has not, and has dropped the "Anonima" from its name. This seems like a plausible redirect to me. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 12:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The company was never called Anonima Italiana Petroli, but Anonima Petroli Italiana. In 2019 it changed its name to Italiana Petroli. InterComMan (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My point was, which I may not have made as well as I could have, with the name having changed it is plausible for a reader to mistake either "Anonima Petroli Italiana" or "Italiana Petroli" for "Anonima Italiana Petroli" given the change in name. As such the redirect is worth keeping. Redirects are not exclusively used for former official names. This Google search shows that there are several examples of this precise mistaken word order on the internet. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 15:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * On the Internet, as I showed you, they are mostly references to other companies. However, if it is a common mistake it does not mean that it should be "legitimised". InterComMan (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think you might have missed one of the points of redirects. They don't legitimise mistakes, they correct them. For example, Scotchland and Scot Land are both redirects to Scotland. I don't think anyone is going to mistakenly type in Scotchland, be taken to a page titled Scotland, and think that Scotchland is the correct spelling. Similarly, AmericA redirects to United States, Neatherlands redirects to Netherlands, Itali redirects to Italy and Russiya redirects to Russia. (I realise these are all countries, not companies, but it's much easier to think of examples for countries). Redirects exist in part to correct mistakes, not to reinforce them. See WP:POFR for more information on when to use redirects. From the search results linked above, any other companies with this name are likely to be non-notable entities and are unlikely to be searched for or have articles created at this page so I feel this is a valid redirect for a possible mistake. Adam Black talk &bull; contributions 19:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. As I wrote here when declining deletion under WP:R3, "... definitely a plausible redirect (see e.g., Corriere della Sera, https://www.corriere.it/economia/17_novembre_03/api-ip-rete-made-italy-compra-tutte-stazioni-total-erg-d21a9dec-c0e3-11e7-8b75-0df914d10fe2.shtml". That's just one of several instances of its use by solid reliable sources – see GNews, GBooks. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Windows 8.2
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 21%23Windows 8.2

Kafka-trapping
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  .  Jay  💬 15:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Kafka-trapping → List of fallacies (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kafka trap → List of fallacies (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kafka trapping → List of fallacies (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kafkatrap → List of fallacies (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

List of fallacies no longer exists because "Kafkatrapping" isn't a recognised fallacy described in the literature about logic. The list violated WP:LISTGLOSSARY because "Kakfatrapping" does not have a Wikipedia article (and does not qualify for one), just a Wiktionary entry. There has been a prior deletion discussion for Kafka-trap which ended with User:Guarapiranga undoing my removal of List of fallacies and starting a Talk page discussion, which involved getting a third perspective. Since that third perspective was emphatically in favour of removing the entry, I've removed it again. MartinPoulter (talk) 08:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete per removal as discussed at talk page. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 14:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If it's not too late, I'm bundling in and  as avoided double redirects, to avoid a second RfD for those two after this one (although I realise that this might necessitate another relist...sorry!). Courtesy ping, . Note that I am neutral with regards to this nomination, this is a procedural bundling only (if such a term exists) . All the best, &zwj;—&zwj;  a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 14:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Procedural. The last two redirects have only been tagged for a day. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 01:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Knightfall (comics)
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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 (comics), no consensus on what to do with (character), which does not bar someone from boldly restoring and tagging as merge. * Pppery * <sub style="color:#800000">it has begun... 16:04, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * <span id="Knightfall (comics)">Knightfall (comics) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Knightfall (character)">Knightfall (character) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete. No mention of "Knightfall" in the target article. Mika1h (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: For an opinion on Knightfall (character). Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay  💬 13:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget "(comics)" to Batman: Knightfall, a DC Comics comic book storyline; when Bruce Wayne Batman broke his back and was replaced by Azrael and then Nightwing as Batman -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Retarget Knightfall (comics) per 65.92.247.66, Delete Knightfall (character). -Elmer Clark (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Tagged Knightfall (character) with R with history. Its AfD had closed as redirect last year. Jay  💬 11:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm reverting my close (and relisting) because, as Jay pointed on my talk page, this discussion would be better served by a relist. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * At the Knightfall (character)'s AfD, 5 out of 6 participants voted merge, and two list targets were proposed. However, closed the AfD as redirect, not merge. Merge to the current target, or restore and tag with a merge to. Retarget "(comics)" to Batman: Knightfall per all.  Jay  💬 16:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The Road (upcoming film)
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  . As an unopposed deletion nomination.  Jay  💬 15:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * <span id="The Road (upcoming film)">The Road (upcoming film) → The Road (2023 film) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No longer unreleased. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  11:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Draft:Kokkarakko
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  .  Jay  💬 15:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Draft:Kokkarakko → Kokkarakko (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This should've been a quick WP:G7, but with also having edited, it no longer is, right? But I still hope both of us can agree, that it be deleted. <b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b> (talk)  11:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:RDRAFT -- per this RfC, [t]here is a clear consensus against deletion of draft namespace redirects. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 12:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: per WP:RDRAFT and A smart kitten. (Although for other cases, I don't think that the fact another editor has edited the article has any bearing how/if a redirect left from a move can be deleted.) Skynxnex (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

LGD redirects
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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  .  ✗  plicit  01:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Adur LGD → Adur District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Amber Valley LGD → Amber Valley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Arun LGD → Arun District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Ashfield LGD → Ashfield District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Ashford LGD → Borough of Ashford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Babergh LGD → Babergh District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Barking and Dagenham LGD → London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Barnet LGD → London Borough of Barnet (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Barnsley LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Barnsley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Basildon LGD → Borough of Basildon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Basingstoke and Deane LGD → Basingstoke and Deane (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bassetlaw LGD → Bassetlaw District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bath and North East Somerset LGD → Bath and North East Somerset (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bedford LGD → Borough of Bedford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bexley LGD → London Borough of Bexley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Birmingham LGD → Birmingham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Blaby LGD → Blaby District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Blackburn with Darwen LGD → Blackburn with Darwen (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Blackpool LGD → Borough of Blackpool (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bolsover LGD → Bolsover District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bolton LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Bolton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * <span id="Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole LGD">Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole LGD → Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bracknell Forest LGD → Bracknell Forest (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bradford LGD → City of Bradford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Brent LGD → London Borough of Brent (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Broadland LGD → Broadland (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bromley LGD → London Borough of Bromley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bromsgrove LGD → Bromsgrove District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Broxbourne LGD → Borough of Broxbourne (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Buckinghamshire LGD → Buckinghamshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Burnley LGD → Borough of Burnley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Bury LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Bury (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Calderdale LGD → Calderdale (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cambridge LGD → Cambridge (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Camden LGD → London Borough of Camden (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cannock Chase LGD → Cannock Chase District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Canterbury LGD → City of Canterbury (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Castle Point LGD → Castle Point (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Central Bedfordshire LGD → Central Bedfordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Charnwood LGD → Borough of Charnwood (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Chelmsford LGD → City of Chelmsford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cheltenham LGD → Cheltenham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cherwell LGD → Cherwell (district) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cheshire East LGD → Cheshire East (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cheshire West and Chester LGD → Cheshire West and Chester (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Chesterfield LGD → Borough of Chesterfield (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Chichester LGD → Chichester District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Chorley LGD → Borough of Chorley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Colchester LGD → City of Colchester (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cornwall LGD → Cornwall (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cotswold LGD → Cotswold District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * County Durham LGD → County Durham (district) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Coventry LGD → Coventry (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Crawley LGD → Crawley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Croydon LGD → London Borough of Croydon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Cumberland LGD → Cumberland (unitary authority) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Dacorum LGD → Dacorum (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Darlington LGD → Borough of Darlington (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Dartford LGD → Borough of Dartford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Derby LGD → Derby (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Derbyshire Dales LGD → Derbyshire Dales (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Doncaster LGD → City of Doncaster (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Dorset LGD → Dorset (district) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Dover LGD → Dover District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Dudley LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Dudley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Ealing LGD → London Borough of Ealing (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Cambridgeshire LGD → East Cambridgeshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Devon LGD → East Devon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Hampshire LGD → East Hampshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Hertfordshire LGD → East Hertfordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Lindsey LGD → East Lindsey (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Riding of Yorkshire LGD → East Riding of Yorkshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Staffordshire LGD → East Staffordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * East Suffolk LGD → East Suffolk District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Eastbourne LGD → Eastbourne (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Eastleigh LGD → Borough of Eastleigh (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Elmbridge LGD → Borough of Elmbridge (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Enfield LGD → London Borough of Enfield (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Epping Forest LGD → Epping Forest District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Epsom and Ewell LGD → Epsom and Ewell (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Erewash LGD → Borough of Erewash (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Exeter LGD → Exeter (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Fareham LGD → Borough of Fareham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Fenland LGD → Fenland District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Folkestone and Hythe LGD → Folkestone and Hythe District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Forest of Dean LGD → Forest of Dean District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Fylde LGD → Borough of Fylde (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Gateshead LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Gateshead (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Gedling LGD → Borough of Gedling (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Gloucester LGD → Gloucester (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Gosport LGD → Gosport (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Gravesham LGD → Gravesham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Great Yarmouth LGD → Borough of Great Yarmouth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Greenwich LGD → Royal Borough of Greenwich (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Guildford LGD → Borough of Guildford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hackney LGD → London Borough of Hackney (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Halton LGD → Borough of Halton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hammersmith and Fulham LGD → London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Harborough LGD → Harborough District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Haringey LGD → London Borough of Haringey (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Harlow LGD → Harlow (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Harrow LGD → London Borough of Harrow (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hart LGD → Hart District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hartlepool LGD → Borough of Hartlepool (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hastings LGD → Hastings (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Havant LGD → Borough of Havant (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Havering LGD → London Borough of Havering (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Herefordshire LGD → Herefordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hertsmere LGD → Hertsmere (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * High Peak LGD → High Peak, Derbyshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hillingdon LGD → London Borough of Hillingdon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hinckley and Bosworth LGD → Hinckley and Bosworth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Horsham LGD → Horsham District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hounslow LGD → London Borough of Hounslow (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Huntingdonshire LGD → Huntingdonshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Hyndburn LGD → Hyndburn (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Ipswich LGD → Ipswich (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Isle of Wight LGD → Isle of Wight (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Isles of Scilly LGD → Isles of Scilly (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Islington LGD → London Borough of Islington (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kensington and Chelsea LGD → Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * King's Lynn and West Norfolk LGD → King's Lynn and West Norfolk (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kingston upon Hull LGD → Kingston upon Hull (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kingston upon Thames LGD → Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Kirklees LGD → Kirklees (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Knowsley LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Knowsley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lambeth LGD → London Borough of Lambeth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lancaster LGD → City of Lancaster (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Leeds LGD → City of Leeds (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Leicester LGD → Leicester (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lewes LGD → Lewes District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lewisham LGD → London Borough of Lewisham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lichfield LGD → Lichfield District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Lincoln LGD → Lincoln, England (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Liverpool LGD → Liverpool (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * London LGD → City of London (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Luton LGD → Luton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Maidstone LGD → Borough of Maidstone (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Maldon LGD → Maldon District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Merton LGD → London Borough of Merton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Mid Devon LGD → Mid Devon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Mid Suffolk LGD → Mid Suffolk (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Mid Sussex LGD → Mid Sussex District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Middlesbrough LGD → Borough of Middlesbrough (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Milton Keynes LGD → City of Milton Keynes (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Mole Valley LGD → Mole Valley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * New Forest LGD → New Forest District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Newark and Sherwood LGD → Newark and Sherwood (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Newcastle upon Tyne LGD → Newcastle upon Tyne (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Newcastle-under-Lyme LGD → Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Newham LGD → London Borough of Newham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Devon LGD → North Devon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North East Derbyshire LGD → North East Derbyshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North East Lincolnshire LGD → North East Lincolnshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Hertfordshire LGD → North Hertfordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Kesteven LGD → North Kesteven (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Lincolnshire LGD → North Lincolnshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Norfolk LGD → North Norfolk (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Northamptonshire LGD → North Northamptonshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Somerset LGD → North Somerset (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Tyneside LGD → North Tyneside (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Warwickshire LGD → North Warwickshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North West Leicestershire LGD → North West Leicestershire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * North Yorkshire LGD → North Yorkshire (district) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Northumberland LGD → Northumberland (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Norwich LGD → Norwich (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Nottingham LGD → Nottingham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Nuneaton and Bedworth LGD → Nuneaton and Bedworth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Oadby and Wigston LGD → Oadby and Wigston (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Oldham LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Oldham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Oxford LGD → Oxford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Pendle LGD → Borough of Pendle (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Peterborough LGD → City of Peterborough (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Plymouth LGD → Plymouth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Portsmouth LGD → Portsmouth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Preston LGD → City of Preston, Lancashire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Reading LGD → Reading, Berkshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Redbridge LGD → London Borough of Redbridge (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Redcar and Cleveland LGD → Redcar and Cleveland (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Redditch LGD → Redditch (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Reigate and Banstead LGD → Reigate and Banstead (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Ribble Valley LGD → Ribble Valley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Richmond upon Thames LGD → London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rochdale LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Rochdale (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rochford LGD → Rochford District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rossendale LGD → Borough of Rossendale (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rother LGD → Rother District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rotherham LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rugby LGD → Borough of Rugby (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Runnymede LGD → Borough of Runnymede (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rushcliffe LGD → Rushcliffe (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rushmoor LGD → Rushmoor (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Rutland LGD → Rutland (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Salford LGD → City of Salford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sandwell LGD → Sandwell (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sefton LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Sefton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sevenoaks LGD → Sevenoaks District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sheffield LGD → City of Sheffield (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Shropshire LGD → Shropshire (district) (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Slough LGD → Borough of Slough (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Solihull LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Solihull (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Somerset LGD → Somerset (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Cambridgeshire LGD → South Cambridgeshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Hams LGD → South Hams (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Holland LGD → South Holland District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Kesteven LGD → South Kesteven (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Norfolk LGD → South Norfolk (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Oxfordshire LGD → South Oxfordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Ribble LGD → South Ribble (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Staffordshire LGD → South Staffordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South Tyneside LGD → South Tyneside (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Southampton LGD → Southampton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Southend-on-Sea LGD → Southend-on-Sea (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Southwark LGD → London Borough of Southwark (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Spelthorne LGD → Borough of Spelthorne (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * St Albans LGD → St Albans City and District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * St Helens LGD → Metropolitan Borough of St Helens (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stafford LGD → Borough of Stafford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Staffordshire Moorlands LGD → Staffordshire Moorlands (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stevenage LGD → Stevenage (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stockport LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Stockport (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stockton-on-Tees LGD → Borough of Stockton-on-Tees (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stoke-on-Trent LGD → Stoke-on-Trent (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stratford-on-Avon LGD → Stratford-on-Avon District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Stroud LGD → Stroud District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sunderland LGD → City of Sunderland (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Surrey Heath LGD → Surrey Heath (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Sutton LGD → London Borough of Sutton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Swale LGD → Borough of Swale (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Swindon LGD → Borough of Swindon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tameside LGD → Tameside (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tamworth LGD → Tamworth, Staffordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tandridge LGD → Tandridge District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Teignbridge LGD → Teignbridge (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Telford and Wrekin LGD → Telford and Wrekin (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tendring LGD → Tendring District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Test Valley LGD → Test Valley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tewkesbury LGD → Borough of Tewkesbury (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Thanet LGD → Thanet District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Three Rivers LGD → Three Rivers District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Thurrock LGD → Thurrock (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tonbridge and Malling LGD → Tonbridge and Malling (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Torbay LGD → Torbay (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Torridge LGD → Torridge District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tower Hamlets LGD → London Borough of Tower Hamlets (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Trafford LGD → Trafford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Tunbridge Wells LGD → Borough of Tunbridge Wells (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Uttlesford LGD → Uttlesford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Vale of White Horse LGD → Vale of White Horse (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wakefield LGD → City of Wakefield (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Walsall LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Walsall (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Waltham Forest LGD → London Borough of Waltham Forest (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wandsworth LGD → London Borough of Wandsworth (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Warrington LGD → Borough of Warrington (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Warwick LGD → Warwick District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Watford LGD → Watford (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Waverley LGD → Borough of Waverley (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wealden LGD → Wealden District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Welwyn Hatfield LGD → Welwyn Hatfield (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Berkshire LGD → West Berkshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Devon LGD → West Devon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Lancashire LGD → West Lancashire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Lindsey LGD → West Lindsey (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Northamptonshire LGD → West Northamptonshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Oxfordshire LGD → West Oxfordshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * West Suffolk LGD → West Suffolk District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Westminster LGD → City of Westminster (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Westmorland and Furness LGD → Westmorland and Furness (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wigan LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Wigan (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wiltshire LGD → Wiltshire (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Winchester LGD → City of Winchester (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Windsor and Maidenhead LGD → Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wirral LGD → Metropolitan Borough of Wirral (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Woking LGD → Woking (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wokingham LGD → Borough of Wokingham (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wolverhampton LGD → Wolverhampton (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Worcester LGD → Worcester, England (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Worthing LGD → Worthing (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wychavon LGD → Wychavon (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wyre Forest LGD → Wyre Forest District (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Wyre LGD → Borough of Wyre (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * York LGD → City of York (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

LGD redirects (discussion)
These 282 "foo LGD" redirects were created in the last two days, on 11 and 12 May 2024. briefly described their intent as to aid editing "When you have long-ish lists"; they are intended to redirect to UK local government districts, hence the novel initialism "LGD". They have now been used to shorten the targets of piped links, eg changing Hammersmith and Fulham to Hammersmith and Fulham (with 30 other such changes) at London boroughs and similarly with 7 other new redirects at Greater Manchester. This obscures the targets for other editors and does nothing to help readers. "LGD" is not an initialism in common use in the UK and can't be expected to make searching easier for readers. NebY (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural request: how best can we consider all 285 new "foo LGD" redirects? Must each be tagged and how, and do we want a full list here? Totally outside my experience and toolkit. NebY (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I can go through and tag them semi-automatically using WP:JWB if you'd like. I'm unsure of whether there's a standard for how to list large nominations; but two ideas I had are (a) placing the list on the log's talk page and linking to it from here, or (b) including them above but wrapping the list in cot/cob tags. All the best, &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 12:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @A smart kitten Thank you! Tagging them all seems good and proper, as long as it doesn't make far too much work for the closer if they're kept. I guess having them listed on this page would be better - but yes, definitely wrapped. NebY (talk) 12:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 12:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ (courtesy ping, as I modified your nomination slightly to reflect the fact that all the 282 redirects are now bundled.) &zwj;—&zwj; a smart kitten <sub style="color:#595959">[  meow ] 13:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That's great - thanks again. NebY (talk) 13:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * limited to article space seems to find basically all of them (not sure why it appears to be finding only 282 as of this writing), in case it helps. Skynxnex (talk) 13:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, 282 is correct; turns out my crudely pasting a list of contributions into a spreadsheet's no good. NebY (talk) 13:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The redirects don't appear to be particularly plausible but seem harmless and unambiguous.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 18:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep at least most I agree with Crouch Swale that the majority of these are harmless and unambiguous, which is an obvious keep. However, London LGD → City of London doesn't feel right to me - there isn't a single local government district for London, but if there was one it would be the Greater London Authority (or, in historical contexts, Greater London Council, London County Council or Metropolitan Board of Works). The City of London is never referred to as just "London" in administrative contexts. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete all - they're not plausible search terms and just create unnecessary overheads. Shortcuts aren't conventionally used for the article namespace and I think we'd need project-wide consensus to change that convention. <b style="color:#98F">W</b><b style="color:#97E">a</b><b style="color:#86D">g</b><b style="color:#75C">ge</b><b style="color:#83C">r</b><b  style="color:#728">s</b><small  style="color:#080">TALK  09:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Harmless? Maybe. Useful? Probably not and LGD isn't really used as an initialism for "local government districts". 104.7.152.180 (talk) 20:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is for readers not editors and these redirects don't help readers: in fact they might be confusing if a reader assumes "LGD" is a legitimate well-used abbreviation, which it isn't. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Confirming delete as nominator after listening; they don't help searching and could confuse, are an invention not seen "in the wild" or on Wikipedia, shouldn't be used as a pipe target, and if in the long-term the UK's local government is modified, editors will find they have to take unusual steps to update the encyclopedia. NebY (talk) 11:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

NOT:DICTIONARY
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" 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.   ✗  plicit  01:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * NOT:DICTIONARY → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The "NOT:" namespace doesn't exist, nor it is short for a real namespace. This is the only page of its kind that uses the NOT pseudo namespace and has seen zero usage. (Special:PrefixIndex/NOT:) A (standard) redirect to this page that it points to is WP:DICTIONARY, which is already shorter. JackFromWisconsin (talk &#124; contribs) 01:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete, generally shouldn't be having redirects from mainspace to project space. BilledMammal (talk) 01:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOT works and is sufficient. Jclemens (talk) 01:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:NOTDICTIONARY exists -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 04:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete redundant to WP:NOT -- Lenticel ( talk ) 11:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete We don't need an entire pseudo-namespace just for redirects to What Wikipedia is not. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 12:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Given the issues currently being faced by the 'MOS:' pseudo-namespace. -- LCU A ctively D isinterested  «@» °∆t° 15:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: NOT is not an agreed upon pseudo-namespace and there are plenty of WP:X redirects to the policy page which are short and convenient. <span style="background-color: rgb(240, 233, 205); padding: 3px"><span style="color: rgb(237, 50, 45);">StreetcarEnjoyer  <span style="color: rgb(237, 50, 45);">(talk)  22:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not an appropriate pseudonamespace. — Godsy (TALK<sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;"> CONT ) 23:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).