Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10

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 Murica. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Merica → United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 'Murica → wikt:'Murica  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should point to the same place. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the second redirect was subject to several prior RfDs resulting in the current target. I created the first one over a salt to match the second one, and then it was boldly retargeted using an argument that could apply to both IMO. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I note that Murica is a disambiguation page including a listing for 'Murica as a term referring to the United States. That would at least seem to be a better target than the Wiktionary entry. BD2412 T 15:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget both to Murica per BD2412. I'll note that that disambiguation page was at the time of the 2018 discussion just a redirect to Murcia. Skynxnex (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget both to Murica per above. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Point both to United States and tag them as {{r from colloquial name}}s. Without the apostrophe, they're ambiguous, but there's no ambiguity about the titles with apostrophes. - Eureka Lott 19:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget both to Murica per BD2412. Fieari (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Murica, a well-crafted disambig page that neatly covers all possible topics here. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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 M (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 20:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• M. → Monsieur  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

English Wikipedia is not so closely affiliated with the French language that a single punctuated letter "M" should redirect to an article on a French word, rather than to the disambiguation page, M (disambiguation), which lists other things that might be punctuated. Retarget to M (disambiguation). BD2412 T 13:12, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom; agree that there' enough things referred to as just M, let alone M., that disambiguation would be generally more useful. Skynxnex (talk) 15:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. mwwv(converse) 16:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget since I now want to watch some James Bond films. Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget although mentioned once in the target I don't think its likely to be primary in English. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

The result of the discussion was retarget to List of generation IV Pokémon. Jay 💬 16:47, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Pokédex (Sinnoh) → Gameplay of Pokémon#Pokédex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

retarget to the list of gen 4 pokémon? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Sinnoh Pokédex doesn't only include Gen 4 pokémon, but it isn't unlikely that someone would be looking for these specifically when typing it. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on retargeting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as per Cogsan. I can definitely see someone typing "pokedex (region)" or "pokedex (gen X)" into the search bar in order to get at a list of Pokemon found in that region/generation. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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. ✗plicit 23:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 98.0 FM (disambiguation) → 98.0 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.1 FM (disambiguation) → 98.1 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.2 FM (disambiguation) → 98.2 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.3 FM (disambiguation) → 98.3 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.4 FM (disambiguation) → 98.4 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.5 FM (disambiguation) → 98.5 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.6 FM (disambiguation) → 98.6 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.7 FM (disambiguation) → 98.7 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 98.9 FM (disambiguation) → 98.9 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 99.1 FM (disambiguation) → 99.1 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 99.7 FM (disambiguation) → 99.7 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 99.9 FM (disambiguation) → 99.9 FM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete these redirects, because whilst the targets of these redirects list radio stations that broadcast the respective frequencies, they are not disambiguation pages, or pages that disambiguate articles that might otherwise be called e,g. "99.9 FM" (i.e. they are not disambiguation-like pages). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:CHEAP. I can't speak to other countries, but, in the U.S., referring to radio stations by their frequencies is fairly common (more so than being referred to by their callsigns). It seems plausible that a searcher would look for a specific station by its frequency. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 13:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Presidentman: So how does a superfluous (disambiguation) redirect help such a Searcher? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Presidentman - 98.5 FM is close enough to a dab page for me. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, redirects in (disambiguation) pointing to set indexes or lists are useful enough and should be kept. Many people are not familiar with the distinction between set index and disambiguation, and removing them would only make it harder for people wanting to deliberately link to the list page rather than to any primary topic. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Chaotic Enby: How does deleting a superfluous redirect make anything harder in these cases? None of these nominated redirects has any incoming link, and none has any utility, to anyone. The way to link to the list of stations that broadcast on 98.0 FM is with 98.0 FM: that's not harder, it's easier. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    For all the reasons why we always keep (disambiguation) redirects for dab pages, mostly because it facilitates deliberately linking to the list in case it is moved or one item becomes the primary topic. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 10:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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. Jay 💬 20:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:FLUFF → Wikipedia:Wikipuffery  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:Fluff → Wikipedia:Wikipuffery  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should have the same target as MOS:PUFFERY. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 17:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:AINTBROKE. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• It is "broke", per the outcome of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 25#Wikipedia:PUFF. Whether or not fluff is associated with the manual of style is the question, as it would be more helpful to point to a policy page rather than a user essay if it does. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The essay reads to me like a combination of MOS:PUFFERY and WP:RELEVANCE, WP:BLOATED, WP:FART or other explanations related to WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Looking through the internal links (there aren't many), I can see people using it to refer to these ideas and not just language-use as seen at MOS:PUFFERY. As a note: there was an 11 y/o redlink that got filled out by this redirect (~8 years ahead of the WP:FLUFF's creation) and the target makes sense in the context of that discussion. Seems intuitive based on that and useful enough. ― Synpath 01:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go. Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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 Constitution of the Republic of China. Restored previous target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Constitution of Taiwan → Additional Articles of the Constitution of the Republic of China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Propose reverting target to Constitution of the Republic of China. I know there is a hatnote, but not sure why it was boldly retargeted. All references to "Constitution of Taiwan" in reliable sources I could find were referring to the original document, not any amendments unless explicitly stated. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support reversion, the meaning of Taiwanese constitution from Taiwanese government sites to Britannica. CMD (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support reversion. While the original constitution is the Constitution of the Republic of China, the move isn't that out of nowhere as Additional Articles are de facto a new constitutional system on top of the old one, establishing a completely different system. However, they are not directly referred to as a constitution, and the hatnote is enough to explain this. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Support reversion back to Constitution of the Republic of China, as we consider "Republic of China" and "Taiwan" to refer to the same subject generally. DankJae 20:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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 💬 09:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 2016 Swedish Football Division 2 → Division 2 (Swedish football)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target article gives no information whatsoever on the 2016 season of the Division 2. It was created "as to avoid redlink at 2015 Swedish Football Division 1 article", which is not a good reason, since a red link would do no harm at 2015 Swedish Football Division 1, and could lead to an actual article being created about the 2016 Swedish Football Division 2. The redirect inhibits that. Geschichte (talk) 06:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 22:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom AlexandraAVX (talk) 11:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. GiantSnowman 18:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This redirect has an error in the title Мункач Варош (talk) 06:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, harmless and has been around since 2005. Geschichte (talk) 06:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Plausible error Okmrman (talk) 13:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, plausible misspelling. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: as a misspelling. Note: I fixed the template on the redirect and added R from misspelling. Skynxnex (talk) 23:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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 💬 09:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:BRRRD → Wikipedia:Edit warring  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:BRRRRRD → Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These two have similar names, but redirect to different pages. I'm unsure what these should redirect to, but I'm leaning towards a retarget both to Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle#Edit warring. mwwv(converse) 17:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both - unnecessary joke shortcuts with ambiguous targets. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both - They're harmless and currently being used by a handful of users each on talk pages. No need to break it for them. If REALLY necessary (and it isn't) I don't object to retargeting both to Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle#Edit warring, but it just doesn't seem necessary. Redirects are WP:CHEAP, and these are and have been useful to someone. It's not a harmful or ambiguous thing, it's not going to effect normal users, no one is going to search for these... yeah, these may be jocular, but they can make a useful rhetorical point. Again, while there was no real need to create them in the first place, there's no harm in having them either. Fieari (talk) 07:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both per Fieari, and per WP:FUNPOLICE. jp×g🗯️ 21:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as harmless and unproblematic. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 23:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• XJP → Xi Jinping  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Wikipedia:GLOBAL，When "XJP" comes to my mind, I'd like to think of it as "Xi JinPing", "Singapore" (the abbre. Roman spell of 新加坡), and "X Japan". I feel confused of whether "XJP" could be an appropriate redirection or not, so I'd like to start a discussion about it. Sinsyuan✍️🌏🚀 02:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Search results in the engines I tried are overwhelmingly for Xi, with some results for a non-notable cryptocurrency. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:23, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. That is the first result I get when I search XJP. Maybe make XJP (disambiguation) and add hatnote on the Xi Jinping page. Okmrman (talk) 14:54, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).