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 unopposed. Deryck C. 17:28, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Community kitchen → One World Cafe  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete per WP:REDLINK. A community kitchen is a generic concept (similar to but distinct from a soup kitchen, at least in my understanding) and should not be redirected to one particular example - the target article even begins "One World Everybody Eats (OWEE) is a nonprofit community kitchen and foundation...". I discovered this as I was checking whether it would make a good target for the "kitchen community" redirect being discussed below. Thryduulf (talk) 22:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment shouldn't this point to soup kitchen ? -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 05:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. A soup kitchen is a similar concept, but it's not the same, and the idea of a community kitchen isn't mentioned there. --BDD (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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 procedural close as this is a move request. You can find the requested move discussion here: Talk:Right (disambiguation)#Requested move 24 June 2015 (non-admin closure) -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Right → Rights  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The term "right" most of the time does not automatically mean "rights" - there are many other considerations and none of them have primary importance the way "rights" is. With that, I ask that we move Right (disambiguation) to the base name. (Note that all of the other relative direction articles: left, up, and down are all dab pages, as should be "right".) <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 19:39, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of the links to the page are using it as the singular for "rights", so rights seems to be the article people usually mean to link to when they link right. --Pfhorrest (talk) 20:29, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We can just correct those 200 or so articles that link to the redirect. A bot might be able to help us do that. We don't have to do anything about the talk/user pages as most dab pages have incoming links like that. At least, we want to be consistent - there is a reason why the other dab pages are located at the base names. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 21:10, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Some Gadget Geek is right, we should disambiguate this, as with the other directional nouns. Then right will usually be wrong, but it's an easy fix, or we can leave it for the monthly disambiguation challenge. Ivanvector (talk) 23:33, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Come to think of it this is actually a move request, moving Right (disambiguation) over this redirect, which I support. @Some Gadget Geek: is it OK with you to withdraw this Rfd and start a requested move discussion instead? Ivanvector (talk) 15:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Withdraw this RfD discussion per Ivanvector. We should make a request to move Right (disambiguation) to Right. SONIC678 |Let’s hang out here 16:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 17:25, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Fortum Shipping Company → Neste  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm a bit unclear on whether this company is owned by Neste or Fortum. Fortum Shipping is mentioned at MT Tempera where it says it's affiliated with Fortum, but the corporate histories are sufficiently tangled, and the shipping company isn't mentioned on either article, so delete per WP:REDLINK. BDD (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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. Well, there you go. I love when a relisting is productive. --BDD (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Albert Pooholes → Albert Pujols  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm nominating this as a test case of sorts for WP:RFD#D3. On one hand, "Pooholes" is a phonetically accurate way to pronounce his name in English and could be helpful for someone who has only heard his name but not seen it spelled. On the other hand, it could be seen as offensive (poohole = asshole). Tavix| Talk  16:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the speedy criterion WP:G10, but I'd like to see the discussion play out. The IPA is Spanish pronunciation: [puˈxols] according to the article, meaning that the pronunciation is closer to "poo-holse", with the h being more like the ch in Scottish loch, a hard s, and emphasis on the final syllable. Thus I think "pooholes" is really a thinly-veiled insult hiding behind phonetics, and we should delete it. Ivanvector (talk) 19:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• While that is true (except the emphasis is on the first syllable), it gets approximated in English to "POO-holes" (reference). Tavix| Talk  19:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be right. The ˈ is supposed to indicate that emphasis is on the syllable which follows, so our IPA in the article may be incorrect (should be [pu.xols]), unless he pronounces his name differently in Spanish. It does seem that this is a well-known approximation (whether erroneous or not) so I guess we should keep it, possible offense notwithstanding. Ivanvector (talk) 15:09, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to bias this discussion; I have boldly corrected the IPA in the article. Ivanvector (talk) 15:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to bias it any more; my edit was reverted with a comment that the emphasis is on the second syllable in Spanish. I don't know why we pronounce someone's name differently in English than in their native language, but it seems that we do (per sources) so my !vote doesn't change. Ivanvector (talk) 21:35, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird. I'd want to see a source then because that doesn't follow normal Spanish stress rules. According to Stress in Spanish, "vowel-final words and those ending in -s or -n are usually stressed on the penultimate syllable." According to Pujols (disambiguation), the name is actually Catalan, so I guess that language has different stress rules? Could User:Alakzi help me out here? Tavix| Talk  23:00, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[1], 40 seconds in and again at 1:20. Alakzi (talk) 23:15, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I don't know why I didn't think to do that myself... Tavix| Talk  15:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan has a completely different prononuciation of J, at least as far as I heard it (from people who speak it). I don't think this particular person's name is Catalan. Si Trew (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tavix is saying that it's of Catalan origin. Of course they're not gonna code-switch to Catalan to pronounce his name - they don't speak the language! Alakzi (talk) 19:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the point (and as a major contributor to Template:Ety -> {{etymology}} I might have some idea). It is not Catalan, another claims, it is English. But pronounced in a Catalan way. That may be true of the target, but it is not true of the redirect. Nobody in Catalonia writes or says "Pooholes". Why Spanish should be thrown in when it is Catalan or English, I don't know, that is muddying already unclean waters. Si Trew (talk) 20:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He was attempting to explain the stress placement in Spanish. It's not important. Alakzi (talk) 20:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As an FYI, a word ending in -ls in Catalan is normally stressed on the last syllable (source). Since the surname "Pujols" is of Catalan origin, we've solved the mystery. Let's put this tangent to rest. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Perhaps it is important. If his native language is Catalan then why are we providing an IPA for Spanish? The article categorizes him as a Dominican of Catalan descent and also as an American of Dominican descent, both with no sources. It looks to me like the Catalan pronunciation would be closer in English to "PUDGalls". Let me try another way: I'm Canadian-English of Dutch descent, but my Dutch ancestors changed their name (or more likely had their name changed) from Zomerplaag to Summers upon immigrating to England. Point being that the name's origin is not necessarily indicative of its modern pronunciation. I would go by what the article says, and not the surname dab. Ivanvector (talk) 21:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's Dominican, so it seems rather unlikely that his native language would be Catalan. The category should be removed unless a source can be found. Alakzi (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having a hard time finding sources on his ancestry, but this article from BBC Mundo refers to him as a "hijo de Catalanes" (son of Catalans). -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment while creator has made questionable edits in the past, this creation seems to be innocent. Check out its edit history. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:07, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Tavix does well to bring these test cases to get consensus. I am veering towards WP:RFOREIGN. A Gsearch gives me ESPN.com for the baseball player first and second, and this article at Wikipedia third: so that is not much help. If we had for example Bert Pujols, Bertie Pujols, Al Pujols, Ally Pugols et cetera ad nausaum I could see a case that it was WP:NICKNAME: But it isn't. What remains is an English-language WP:NICKNAME that is not WP:RS (I tried), so because it is not RS I say delete. Were it RS, or I could find an RS, I would say otherwise. Si Trew (talk) 13:15, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SimonTrew: Have a look at [2], [3], [4]. We could argue about the reliability of those sources, but the point is that this is not a Wikipedia creation. Ivanvector (talk) 14:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, RFOREIGN doesn't apply as it isn't a foreign language redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not sure about this. The third source (bleacherreport.com) says he is the "most dominant player in the world": so presumablz if zou know anything about baseball you know this man. The thing is, baseball is not really known outside of the US. In that way it is not WP:WORLDWIDE.

I am not very much a sports watcher, but much as it may pain our American cousins, baseball is not really very big this side of the pond (the reverse might be said for soccer). It is kinda a foreign language redirect, but I agree you are right to reject it: the name is (I presume) Spanish – well American Hispanic but it is not as if the chap is wearing a Sombrero and smoking a Havana cigar while running in his zapatas from third to fourth base.

I'll continue to try to find other reasons to delete it. It is, after all, a test case. The lede doesn't have an {{lang-es}} for example, but that's too marginal even for me. We could make a note at the {{surname}} DAB for Pujols and leave it at that. Si Trew (talk) 16:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

His name in English is "Albert Pujols." The only way RFOREIGN would apply is if a language unrelated to him spelled his name as "Albert Pooholes" but that's not the case here. You should also check out Baseball#Baseball around the world because baseball is popular in many countries. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:13, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) yes I am aware it is an English-language name, that is the sticking point, isn't it? I'll continue to try to find other reasons to delete it. It is, after all, a test case. The lede doesn't have an {{lang-es}} for example, but that's too marginal even for me. We could make a note at the {{surname}} DAB for Pujols (disambiguation) and leave it at that. Pujols goes to our man Bert, and that is a bit WP:UNDUE I think. Si Trew (talk) 16:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The examples Ivanvector gives are all to a WP:BLOG, pronouncenames.com I don't know how RS that is, and bleacherreport.com, marginally RS. We are not the sports pages of a newspaper, either, WP:NOTNEWS. Si Trew (talk) 18:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledged already that those links would not pass WP:RS if used as a reference in an encyclopedia article; that's not the point. I offered the links to demonstrate that this is a common English approximation of the pronunciation of his name. Thus, if someone comes to Wikipedia and types it into the search box, it's this article that they're looking for. The aural resemblance to the posterior body orifice is coincidental rather than deliberately offensive, though that doesn't stop some immature sports bloggers snickering about it. Also soccer is plenty big here, though I'd guess not as much as over there. Ivanvector (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep In English, Pujols sounds like "Poo-Holes". Seems like a sensible redirect for people who hear is name, but aren't sure of how exactly to spell his name. Canuck^{89 (what's up?)} 20:56, June 23, 2015 (UTC)
• Delete I don't believe it is a scalable approach to have redirects for various phonetic pronunciations of all notable persons. External search engines should provide sufficient assistance to readers seeking the correct spelling, and editors should be sufficiently knowledgeable in the subject matter to link the correct spelling rather than a phonetic version. isaacl (talk) 22:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A good point, but this is a well-known pronunciation. And why rely on external search engines when we have our own? Ivanvector (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that external search engines may not be available in all environments (e.g. Wikipedia Zero). Thryduulf (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not cost-effective for Wikipedia to replicate the efforts of external search engines, which are able to perform statistical-based searches based on the huge number of queries they serve every day and so can deal with phonetic queries without requiring a redirect page to be created on Wikipedia to handle them. Every notable person has well-known phonetic pronunciations, and if these redirects aren't using IPA, there will be numerous possible variants for transliterating them. Letting external search engines do their job is more efficient. isaacl (talk) 08:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per WP:BLP I cannot believe that it took so much discussion and a relisting! What all of you miss is that the name is correctly pronounced "Poohalls". Adding an "e" (Pooholes) is obviously malicious.--The Theosophist (talk) 10:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alakzi gave a link to a video where the last name is pronounced in Spanish with a long o sound. isaacl (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, when it is so highly probable that someone may be offended by it, and it is not a legitimate nickname, it has to be deleted. That is my understanding of BLP.--The Theosophist (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only if unsourced. We have sources indicating that this is a well-known approximation of his name used by English-language sports writers. It passes the BLP test in that regard. Ivanvector (talk) 15:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an approximation of his name used by writers; it's a guidance for pronunciation used by some sources. isaacl (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for the same reason we deleted Pubic goods; while it is plausible as phonetic pronunciation, it's far more likely to serve as a catalyst for disruption to a degree that outweighs any very small benefit it might have. (And I happen to be a very ardent Yankee fan, so I know the subject well and have no special love for Pujols). The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm finally coming off of the fence in light of a couple comments that have been made. I agree with isaacl's comments and I actually think that Wikipedia's search engine can be used to find the correct spelling when typing in "Albert Pooholes" (The first result is "Albert Pujols" and it doesn't say that it appears because "Albert Pooholes" redirects there). I also agree with The Blade of the Northern Lights. If a redirect can be used in a harmful or disruptive fashion, there's no need for it to exist. Taking both of these comments, we have a problem (it's harmful) and a solution to the problem that doesn't include keeping the redirect (use the search engine). -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete And salt afterwards. Completely inappropriate. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - this has been a very good discussion. I see a consensus developing here that the possibility that this is a valid pronunciation or a valid approximation of the pronunciation used by commentators or writers or whatever (given what questionable sources there are for this) is outweighed by the possibility of harm due to offense from the schoolyard comparison to the posterior orifice, and after much thought, I agree. However, I don't think we have any reason to believe that the creation of this redirect was malicious, certainly not clear evidence. Ivanvector (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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 Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics#Discretionary sanctions (1932 cutoff). I'm not exactly sure what the hatnote is supposed to look like, so feel free to change it. --BDD (talk) 15:01, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:ARBAPDS → Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Shortcut points to an old sanction no longer in effect. Change destination of shortcut to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American_politics_2#Discretionary_sanctions_.281932_cutoff.29 as the superseding sanction in the same topic area that is more restrictive (DS actually applied to all AP articles, not just able to be applied via motion)

At new location, add some clarifying text to the shortcut box that points to old location and date of change (per comment from Thyrduulf in discussion below)

Currently shortcut is only ~1 year old (and created by me), so will not cause a large disruption of old discussions using the shortcut, and anywhere someone was reading the old sanction, they probably want to know about the new one anyway.

See commentary from L235 and Thryduulf at User_talk:Gaijin42#Wikipedia:Arbitration.2FRequests.2FCase.2FAmerican_politics_2_closed Gaijin42 (talk) 16:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• support retargetting with hatnote per my comments on Gaijin42's talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 18:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Thryduulf's proposal to retarget but put a note at the new target regarding the old history (see Gaijin42's talk page). Ivanvector (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Intrastate → List of Interstate Highways  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This needs some discussion. All of the incoming links from other articles have nothing to do with the concept of a primary Interstate Highway that does not cross state lines, like Interstate 43 or Interstate 96. The former target of the redirect, List of intrastate Interstate Highways, has been redirected to List of Interstate Highways, an article that already notes which are intrastate-only.

If the original article at this title were restored, it should be deleted without a redirect. The current redirect isn't very specific to the current target topic as well. I'm not sure what we should do now, so I leave it to others to decide. I favor outright deletion at the moment. Imzadi 1979 → 07:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - as a redirect, it's too vague, and this fails WP:NOTDICT. If I search "intrastate" on my Canadian Google, I get through 10 pages with no results about intrastate highways. If I search "intrastate highway" the first several links are to Wikipedia, suggesting that we invented this term. Ivanvector (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unrelated ; "intrastate" means not international -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 07:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually it means "within (a/the) state", for whichever meaning of state is given by context. It only means "not international" when the context is nation states. As state is a disambiguation page it seems clear to me that there is no primary meaning we can assume without context. Thryduulf (talk) 11:25, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: wikt:intrastate says it's primarily an American word, which I might want to contest. It's clearly used in Mexico (see: Intrastate region) and other countries, such as Australia, that have "states" (I found a usage in Tasmanian beer, for example). It can also be used more generally to refer to nation states per Thryduulf. Intrastate Coal and Use Act is really the only other notable use that I've found (see here). As such, I'd support either deletion because our search engine would be more helpful than a redirect or a soft redirect to wikt:intrastate if that page gets cleaned-up. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't know what should be done with this redirect, but it shouldn't point to the current target (principle of least astonishment and all). --Rschen7754 04:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I'm sure "Intrastate" can refer to more than Interstate Highways that are located in a single state. Dough4872 02:01, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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. It sounds like Yeater could potentially be mentioned somewhere, but she doesn't appear at Justin Bieber or Believe (Justin Bieber album), so for now, her name would be confusing as a redirect. --BDD (talk) 14:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Michael Colt → Justin Bieber  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Mariah Yeater → Justin Bieber  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] The Theosophist (talk) 05:18, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the article. The Theosophist (talk) 05:18, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both Yeater alleges that Bieber is the father of her child, and there is a video claiming that Bieber's real name is Michael Colt. In both cases, unreliable gossip. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both per WP:BLP and WP:HOAX. Ivanvector (talk) 15:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivanvector: Not a hoax, in the Wikipedia sense, because it was not made up by an editor for this article. Instead, the editor had read about it somewhere else.--The Theosophist (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose. An article (redirect) about a hoax, though, which I thought fell under the same guideline. If it's not mentioned at the article then it's probably not notable, and keeping a redirect about it is not good practice. Ivanvector (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Mariah one of his songs on his believe album (deluxe version) is about this incident which mean it plays a role in his life/career and our reader-base would find this a likely search topic, if the incident if not mentioned in his personal life it probably should. I remember this on the news here and i am nowhere near the US. Just look at these search results. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Mariah+Yeater&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=zieMVZGHEebamAXo-IHACA#q=Mariah+Yeater&tbm=nws GuzzyG (talk) 16:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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. I don't know why this was tagged as a redirect to Category talk space; it's a talk page for the WikiProject. (It looks like one discussion was moved from the WT space to the CT space.) Also odd: "Archive 4" was created by moving Archive 3, which was then G7'd. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organizations/Taskforce-Notability/Archive 1 is marked as Archive 3 in the main talk page's archive box, so I think it would be better to move that to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organizations/Archive 3 to avoid further confusion. Chronologically, all those discussions occurred during Archive 2, so this isn't strictly correct, but it won't be the first archive that's out of order. --BDD (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organizations/Archive 4 → Category talk:Organizations/Archive 1  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Another redirect to a talk page that contains a different talk page. The Theosophist (talk) 05:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• What's the proposal here? To redirect the WikiProject Archive talk archive to the category talk archive? or vice versa? --Lquilter (talk) 13:52, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Lquilter: The WikiProject Archive already redirects to the category archive. The problem is that the redirect also contains text.--The Theosophist (talk) 10:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Yes, I saw that; I just thought it was something about this RD discussion. If it was *my* mistake back in the day, my deepest apologies -- let's just fix it. --Lquilter (talk) 14:34, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Remove redirect keep text, obviously. A discussion is not really needed for you to just fix it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I brought it here to help determine where the text will go and also to bring attention to the fact that such bugs do happen.--The Theosophist (talk) 15:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:31, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Preston Wescott Sr./Power → Integrity  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I cannot see the purpose of this cross-namespace redirect. The Theosophist (talk) 05:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the criterion at WP:G5; sockpuppet creation. This doesn't seem to have been left behind by a move, unless the edit summaries were not filled out properly. Both the creator and its sockmaster are indefinitely blocked. Ivanvector (talk) 15:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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 Utah state symbols. --BDD (talk) 14:23, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Utah state motto → Industry  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Although Utah's motto is the word "Industry", this looks more like a dictionary redirect. It would be better to retarget it to List of U.S. state and territory mottos or even to Utah. The Theosophist (talk) 05:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Utah's motto "Industry" actually has the word's "Industriousness" meaning. Perhaps "Diligence" would be a better target. Yours aye,  Buaidh  11:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Buaidh: Indeed. It would still be a dictionary redirect, though.--The Theosophist (talk) 12:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the Diligence article discusses the religious basis of the work ethic which is the origin of the motto.  Buaidh  14:29, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I feel like this has come up before, but I can't find the discussion. Retarget to List of U.S. state and territory mottos. Ivanvector (talk) 15:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• retarget to List of U.S. state and territory mottos where meanings can be explained and linked. Thryduulf (talk) 22:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of Utah state symbols to match redirects such as Utah state fruit. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I will also note the existence of Category:State mottos of the United States as some state's mottoes have their own articles. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of Utah state symbols to match the other Utah symbols. Of course a hatnote to List of U.S. state and territory mottos won't hurt. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

The 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. --BDD (talk) 13:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• IndustrY → Industry  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is not used, its edit history is useless, it serves no historical purpose and it is damn ugly. We cannot keep our garbage because it is old, and thus of "historical quality". The Theosophist (talk) 04:57, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - this is a redirect from CamelCase, we try hard to keep those for historical purposes. We could remove the {{R from other capitalization}} tag, it isn't really that. Ivanvector (talk) 15:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I always feel silly arguing about Rcats, which are rarely of much consequence, but I think the current tag is correct. It does just vary from the target in capitalization, so {{R from other capitalisation}} applies. And it isn't quite camel case, since it's not a compound word or phrase consisting of "Industr" and "Y". --BDD (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Way back in the early days of Wikipedia (before even my time), articles had to have titles in the pattern UlU - one or more uppercase letters followed by one or more lowercase letters followed by one or more uppercase letters (optionally followed by additional upper or lowercase letters or numbers without spaces). Thus multiple word titles were written in camelcase, e.g. UnitedKingdom, single word titles had an uppercase letter inserted in them - at a morpheme boundary if there were any, e.g. WikiPedia or the last letter if there weren't, e.g. IndustrY. Single letter titles were repeated, e.g. the article about the letter U was at UuU (the history of that title is now at Wikipedia:UuU). I don't recall what happened with two-letter titles. So Keep to preserve links. As for the Rcat, we have {{R from CamelCase}}... Thryduulf (talk) 22:19, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wow, I didn't know that the software required a second uppercase letter. I still think that's technically not camel case in the usual sense, but for our purposes, I think we can say it is. --BDD (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, technically it didn't require them for article names - it just required them for links to articles (and an article you can't link to is of limited use). See Wikipedia:CamelCase and Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 23:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this is clearly a {{R from camelcase}} and from that era. Further it is harmless so works as a {{R from typo}} -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the above. This redirect is a {{R from camelcase}}, from the time where article titles had to have a mix of capital and lowercase letters. Like 70.51.203.69 said, it's harmless and also works as a {{R from typo}}, so we should add the {{R from typo}} tag to the redirect. SONIC678 |Let’s hang out here 23:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment.It's not really CamelCase, but Pushmi-pullyu Case, then. Si Trew (talk) 14:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• List of countries by economic system → Economy  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Per WP:RFD#D10 The Theosophist (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree, this could be made into a list, and redirecting this to Economy doesn't make a lot of sense. Per WP:REDLINK and per nom. Ivanvector (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Ivanvector. Thryduulf (talk) 22:20, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Kitchen community → Industrial suburb  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete as inaccurate redirect. "Kitchen community" is not in general use as a synonym for an industrial suburb, and Googling "industrial suburb" "kitchen community" only turns up mirrors/copies of the first line of the Wikipedia article industrial suburb, which starts out with the inaccurate claim that "an industrial suburb (sometimes called a kitchen community) is [...]," but gives no substantiation or citation for those two terms being the same. —Lowellian (reply) 04:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, I can't find any evidence of this phrase being a synonym either. I don't think that retargeting to commuter town would be appropriate either, for the same reason. Ivanvector (talk) 15:16, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Honestly I can't even remember why I created this redirect. It was a long time ago. If as the nom says it is inappropriate then I have no problem with it being removed. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Thryduulf (talk) 22:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• XHJST -TV → Canal de las Estrellas  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There is no XHJST-TV in Mexico, and even if there were, the space in the callsign would make this an unlikely search query. Raymie (t • c) 03:51, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Looks like a good-faith accidental transclusion of letters (thinking XHSJT-TV since that's a channel 2 signal like this was categorized as once) and a RD made in haste. Nothing incoming, no harm to delete. Nate • (chatter) 03:56, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's probably what this was. My first thought was XHJZT-TV but that's a channel 3. I've found a couple other misspelled redirects of this type as well in recent months. Raymie (t • c) 21:59, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Uzbek Ozbekistan → Uzbekistan  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Implausible search term/mix of languages - TheChampionMan1234 00:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete looks like an implausible synonym. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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