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 Irish-Scots. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Hiberno-Scots → Ulster Scots  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

retarget to Hiberno-Scottish mission? Heanor (talk) 12:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the current redirection seems correct. I see no material connection to the missions of the Irish to Scotland, which happened in a linguistic context of Irish (Geailge) and Scottish Gaelic (Gaidhligh) + Church Latin, and had nothing to do with the Scots language (an anachronistic concept). SeoR (talk) 12:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SeoR, then maybe retarget to Irish-Scots? Hibernia is just the Latin name for Ireland. --Heanor (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Heanor, it depends on what we think the term refers to. When I hear it, I think "obscure version of the term 'Ulster Scots'" which refers to what most scholars consider to be a dialect of the Scots language (but some campaigners see as a distinct language) - and this view is discussed by Milroy, Kirk and others, if you want to dive into it. You are obviously coming from the perspective of "a group of people linked to the Scottish people / Scots" and if that is an attested meaning (I've never heard it used that way) then it is related to the terms "Irish-Scots" (Irish descent in Scotland) and "Scots-Irish" (Scottish descent in Ireland). If both linguistic and demographic meanings do exist, we need not a redirect but a disambiguation page... SeoR (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SeoR, thank you. I created Irish-Scots DAB, thus probably better to redirect there. --Heanor (talk) 11:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems a good solution, thanks for the clear interaction. SeoR (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• While the DAB is fine, it does not have a mention of Hiberno. How about rephrasing it to Irish-Scots or Hiberno-Scots may refer to:? See the redirect Hiberno-American which goes to Irish Americans that says Irish Americans or Hiberno Americans are Americans who.... Jay (talk) 22:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Retarget to Irish-Scots. Jay (talk) 19:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I fixed the DAB. --Heanor (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2022 (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 Ulster Scots nation to Ulster Scots people, keep other redirect. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:10, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Ulster Scots nation → Ulster nationalism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

• Ulster Scots nationalism → Ulster nationalism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

retarget first to Ulster Scots people, and keep the second (which I created myself)? Heanor (talk) 12:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Ulster Scots nationalism to Ulster nationalism as there is no real other interpretation of that. I could go either way on Ulster Scots nation being redirect to Ulster Scots people versus Ulster nationalism. If we go based off of precedent from other redirects, it seems like the _ nation redirect rarely exists and in the one other case I can find which is Jewish nation that redirects to Jews and not Israel or Jewish national movements unlike Jewish nationalism which redirects to Jewish national movements. TartarTorte 13:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 22:36, 25 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:16, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Cerro Espartillo → Avianca Flight 410  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete per WP:R#D #10: the edit summary creating this redirect suggests that this is a notable topic better served by a redlink than a redirect to a target only tangentially related to the topic. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The flight itself is not the same as the mountain, nor does the article on the flight have much coverage on the mountain itself. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 08:06, 26 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Evil Horse Kingdom → Yamatai  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Does not appear to be another name for the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As best I can tell, the creating user SiliconProphet was using machine translation to convert various Japanese and German Wikipedia articles for publication here on the English Wikipedia. The user did not seem to have a very good grasp of machine translation, nor of Japanese. Various parts of content sourced from the Japanese Wikipedia are still in Japanese, as we can see at Draft:Kannabi or Draft:The four supreme deities. I haven't vetted their attempts at converting German-language articles, other than to notice that their draft article Draft:Johann Gottfried Biedermann is still entirely in German.

In this specific case, "Evil Horse Kingdom" is a very poor machine translation of the source Japanese term 邪馬台国 (Yamatai-koku). The characters 邪馬台 were used in the original Japanese for their phonetic values, 邪 (ya), 馬 (ma), and 台 (tai), with the last character 国 (koku) used for its semantic value of "country". Whatever machine translation engine they used was not aware of this, and instead translated the first two characters 邪 and 馬 using their semantic values of "evil, malevolent" and "horse", while apparently ignoring the third character 台 altogether.

I note that the redirecting page at Evil Horse Kingdom was also created by this same user. I suspect that they were unaware that "Evil Horse Country" was machine-translated gibberish, and they created the redirect page out of a misguided thought that this was an actual English-language name for Yamatai.

Considering the apparent incompetence that led to the creation of the redirect page, the novelty of this name for Yamatai (i.e. no one else calls it this), and the lack of any meaningful pages listed at Special:WhatLinksHere/Evil_Horse_Kingdom, I think we must delete this redirect page. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 23:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Character-by-character translations of placenames are usually unlikely search terms even if correct, and as Eiríkr Útlendi notes, this translation is plain old wrong, since the characters are a transcription of some underlying Old Japanese word and are not used for their ordinary meaning. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 03:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Eiríkr Útlendi's findings --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:35, 26 January 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Constituent country → Country (disambiguation)#Administrative divisions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I propose to retarget to Constituent state. Heanor (talk) 15:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and perhaps add a hatnote to Constituent state in the original redirect. A constituent country is not necessarily the same as a constituent state, if I understand correctly. The United Kingdom has four constituent countries but the countries form one state, to give an example. This distinction appeared to be pointed out at Talk:Constituent state#Mentioning of Constituent countries Bonoahx (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Bonoahx, sorry, I cannot get this distinction. Can you elaborate a bit more? --Heanor (talk) 07:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heanor per CMD it is a vague term and there can be a distinction between state and country. For example, the United Kingdom is a state - England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are countries. I believe a similar example is Greenland, which is a country that is part of Denmark, a state. Bonoahx (talk) 20:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    • Bonoahx, I would say that England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are constituent states like Florida, Delaware or California. But they (constituent states) are part of sovereign states, the UK and USA respectively. --Heanor (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      • I'm wary of making this a geopolitical debate but the UK is not a federal state like the US so states in the American sense don't exist in the UK. I am thinking of the general definition of state being a nation that is under one government. Bonoahx (talk) 22:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I think there's a BCA to be written here. Assuming no one writes such an article while this RfD is pending, maybe dabify (with the first three entries of the target section) and tag with {{BCA}}? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 23:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this is a vague term without a distinct meaning, and a dab page is an appropriate target. The Constituent state page, covering a similarly handwavy term, is predictably a large jumble of WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. (The BCA already exists at Administrative division, not that it's a great article itself.) CMD (talk) 23:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternatively, retarget to the BCA, Administrative division. CMD (talk) 08:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Sovereign country targets Sovereign state. User:Tamzin, CMD. --Heanor (talk) 07:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Bonoahx and CMD. The disambiguation page is the best target for this vague term. Thryduulf (talk) 15:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should this target the BCA or is the current target fine?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The term does seem to be used most often in connection with the UK, but also in connection with the Netherlands, and the existing redirect will help readers figure out what they are looking for. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:33, 26 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Knockout Night → Badou Jack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - most "knockout nights" don't have anything to do with Badou Jack, and the Badou Jack article has no mention of it. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 08:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Badou Jack Promotions once co-organised an event called "Knockout Night" in Dubai. Even if it was mentioned in the article, I'd still say it was an unnecessary redirect. Almost all boxing events have names, most are rarely remembered. – ².O.^Boxing 09:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not unique to current target. Seems to be a generic name for events ranging from boxing to real estate parties. --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 05:16, 31 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Primitive dog → Pye-dog  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Primitive dogs → Pye-dog  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

These terms seem to not be synonymous with their target per the existence of Template:Primitive dogs, which has a list of subjects that is not related to the subject at Pye-dog. For this reason, these redirects should probably be deleted per WP:REDLINK. Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, they are ill suited to their current target. It may be possible to create an article with this title one day, but for the moment there is no other suitable article to retarget these to. Cavalryman (talk) 22:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]
• Retarget to Origin of the domestic dog where primitive dogs are at least discussed. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete to defer to search results. Many breeds can be considered "primitive" and no place really discusses the term. Also could refer to other aspects of canid evolution. Absent deletion, Origin of the domestic dog seems like the most appropriate target. In any case, the current target is definitely not ideal. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 05:15, 31 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Mass trucking → Freight transport  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

• Mass truckings → Vehicle-ramming attack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

Neither term is mentioned at their respective targets or anywhere else in Wikipedia. Hits for "mass trucking" in WP:RS are mostly about individual trucking companies [1][2] either named Mass Trucking or located in Massachusetts. The plural gets a "mass truckings" gets a grand total of eight hits on Google Web search [3]. Mass trucking → vehicle-ramming attack was previously deleted (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 17#Mass trucking; I was the sole participant in that discussion besides the nominator). 61.239.39.90 (talk) 18:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The former might be a plausible redirect to an article about road freight transport in Massachusetts, but we don't have such an article. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 27 January 2022 (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 Article restored so no longer in scope of RfD. If anyone thinks the article should be deleted or redirected, they are free to nominate it at AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 13:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society → PRS for Music  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Please delete the redirect of Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society to PRS for Music. Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society is a standalone orgnaisation JHMPA (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since I think you are just trying to get an article back, I have reverted the conversion to a redirect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:56, 26 January 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:18, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Mindsmack → Fastmail  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is an erroneous redirect and the result of confusion during the deletion discussion. The article under discussion should have been redirected to FastMall rather than Fastmail. The correct target for the redirect no longer exists. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Enwiki has no substantive content about Mindsmack. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Courtesy ping David Gerard, K.e.coffman, Lemongirl942, Davey2010, on how voters and the closer were misled by the difference of one alphabet! Jay (talk) 16:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Jake Wartenberg 2 things: A) There was no confusion in that AFD - people !voted Redirect so the AFD was closed as such. Nobody in that AFD was confused. B) The article was redirected to FastMail? unless you're saying the article should've been named FastMail in which that's not my problem and that wasn't in the remit of the AFD (and no rename was ever discussed at that AFD). Anyway delete as Mindsmack isn't mentioned in this article. –Davey2010^Talk 22:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The confusion was with regard to the distinction between Fastmail and FastMall, with only the latter being related to the subject of the article. Fortunately, we all seem to be in agreement about the right course of action going forward. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 23:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• In that case my apologies Jake Wartenberg I misunderstood what you meant, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:44, 2 February 2022 (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Jin Zhengen → Kim Jong-un  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Jin Zhengri → Kim Jong-il  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Jin Richeng → Kim Il-sung  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, appears to be a transliteration of the Chinese pronunciation of Kim Jong-un's name, in which case this should be deleted per WP:RLOTE _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Per the nomination. The Hanyu Pinyin transliteration Jin Zhengen has never been used in English to refer to Kim Jong-un. "Redirects are cheap" but keeping this one would not only be contrary to existing policy but would open up a can of worms for similar redirects, such as Tangnadete Telangpu for Donald Trump. CentreLeftRight ✉ 20:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill: There are actually redirects for Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il using the Chinese pronunciation (Jin Richeng and Jin Zhengri), which was why I created this redirect, to make it consistent. I don’t mind this being deleted, but just giving a heads up about the other ones. 747pilot (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Rosguill. Jin Richeng should also be deleted as a {{db-repost}}; see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 September 10#Jin Richeng. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 05:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: involved relist to bundle with related redirectss
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I've gone ahead and bundled Jin Richeng and Jin Zhengri with this nomination. I note that the RLOTE case against those two is a little less open and shut because both Il-sung and Jong-il likely lived some of their lives in China. That having been said, it's definitely still in the spirit of RLOTE to delete them, as the likelihood of an English-speaker coming across the pinyin transliteration of these names in isolation is next to nil. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:33, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. These are no more likely as search terms than the pinyin transliteration for any other non-Chinese person, like Tangnade Telangpu mentioned above. By the way, strictly speaking Jin Zhengen is misspelled; the correct spelling would be Jin Zheng'en. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:45, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 17:48, 25 January 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• African Judo Union → International Judo Federation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Deletion. Should be deleted to provoke page creation. Also, The link is misleading in Template:International judo, especially when causing a circular redirect at the target. CLalgo (talk) 14:59, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Seems to be a different topic and is not mentioned at the target article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete to encourage article creation. Seems to be one of the continental unions that form the IJF. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:19, 26 January 2022 (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 Wirye#Transportation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wirye station → Namwirye station  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There are many planned stations of Wirye Line which sometimes called as Wirye station. Local government of Seoul banned to use "Wirye station" as the name of Subway 8 station. Wirye station was never official name of Namwirye station Urirnal (talk) 07:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wirye#Transportation where all the stations serving Wirye are listed. Thryduulf (talk) 15:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wirye#Transportation per Thryduulf: good idea. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:23, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Wirye#Transportation per Thryduulf: I will accept this suggestion. Urirnal (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2022 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• 2021 Prince Edward Island Liberal Party leadership election → Next Prince Edward Island Liberal Party leadership election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm proposing this for GoodDay: "The party didn't hold its leadership election in 2021, instead postponing it indefinitely." Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a redirect from a page move. The election was supposed to be held in 2021 and this fact is mentioned at the target. Jay (talk) 05:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - as nominator. GoodDay (talk) 17:52, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The election that was to be held in 2021 is covered by the target article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment- I must confess to being surprised why anyone would want to keep that 2021 re-direct? The PEI Liberal Party leadership election-in-question, will eventually be held & when its date is named? The article will be moved to the Year that's named, thus rendering the 2021 re-direct even more useless, then it already is. GoodDay (talk) 09:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not out of the question for someone to come across a source discussing a 2021 election (from before it got pushed back) and wondering "I wonder whatever happened with that election". Being directed to an article that answers that query is useful. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as the rare {{R from Move}} that seems to be not useful as it can confuse. It's unlikely to be used as a redirect for someone looking for the Next PEI Liberal Party election because that is not happening in 2021 and if this happens this year or say next year it could be construed as WP:SURPRISE when this page would eventually redirect to 2023 Prince Edward Island Liberal Party leadership election. TartarTorte 16:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TartarTorte: How it is a surprise for someone using this redirect to be directed to an article that states that an election was to be held on November 13, 2021? -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Jay and Tavix. Anybody searching for this term will find the information they are looking for in the target article. Thryduulf (talk) 13:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Seems appropriate. Wareon (talk) 05:25, 1 February 2022 (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 Restore. It may be sent to AfD or PRODed. Jay (talk) 04:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Gladius fighter → Wing Commander (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete as overly vague redirect that is not mentioned in the target article. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert per BLAR. Most of the google hits for this exact term relate to Star Citizen or Renegade Legion which both seem to be unrelated to the Wing Commander franchise (and each other) and the term is not mentioned in either of those articles. However prior to redirection this was a very short stub article, which should be sent to AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The original stub article is pretty obvious, unsourced, WP:OR fancruft. Sending it to AfD would be a technicality that would result in a SNOW delete. I think it's pointless and not worth doing. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  RfD does not and should not delete article content. The way to avoid technicalities like this it to do a proper WP:BEFORE and nominate the page at AfD first rather than waste time at RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 15:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I've been chastized at AfD for doing literally that. However, be my guest to do what you are suggesting. I will gladly withdraw this RfD and vote delete at the AfD. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment a "gladius fighter" could refer to a fighter armed with a gladius (like similar knife fighter, spear fighter, sword fighter, etc), ie. several Roman gladiator types or a Roman legionnaire -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• @Thryduulf and Zxcvbnm: Given how unlikely this is to be kept at AfD, could we compromise on restore and PROD? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 15:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 17:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:17, 25 January 2022 (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.