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 23:46, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wild asparagus → Asparagus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

A different page, unrelated to the redirect target, exists with the name of the re-direct at Wild Asparagus. The latter page is extremely difficult to find due to the presence of the redirect. TimberToner (talk) 22:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - At the very least a hatnote should be added on Asparagus if this is kept. Note that there's already a hatnote on Wild Asparagus. I'm not certain which is the primary topic for the lowercase version of this (see WP:DIFFCAPS) so no opinion for now on keeping or retargeting. A7V2 (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS, expand hatnote at asparagus, otherwise anyone seeking Wild Asparagus has no way to navigate there. Mdewman6 (talk) 15:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I think this is a great suggestion. I am going to expand the hatnote at asparagus now since it is a cheap edit, and it will help users find Wild Asparagus. After the hatnote is expanded, I think it is still worth discussing if the redirect is worthy of deletion or retargeting. TimberToner (talk) 17:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly deletion is not a reasonable outcome, the question is whether is should be kept as a subtopic of asparagus or be retargeted to Wild Asparagus as {{R from miscapitalization}}. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. I think the expanded hatnote is sufficient here, as most readers searching for "wild asparagus" (lowercase) are almost certainly looking for the plant. Retargeting would probably result in a lot of surprises. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:14, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. Hatnote seems to solve the current issue. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:39, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or possibly DAB, the redirect has 46 views but the band has 122 however redirects often don't get many views due to search engines not landing readers on them and the Asparagus article has 43,626 views[[1]]. Google only returns the plant so it does seem likely the plant is primary for the lower case version. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Grip-Lock → Transformers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article. Was formerly a redirect towards the WP:BLARed via WP:AFD article Mini-Con. Steel1943 (talk) 21:18, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• It's unclear to me why it was ever a redirect to Mini-Con, there was no mention in the version deleted at AfD or the version when the redirect was created [2]. Searching only turns up the motorcycle product, for which this was briefly an "article" [3] created by Captainalen. Since there is no mention (or possibly even connection?) at the current target either restore the article or delete (as the article likely satisfies WP:G11). I may reconsider if mention were added and justified. A7V2 (talk) 00:42, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  For what it's worth to note, the redirect was an article for about 5 days before it was redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 01:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes that's a good point. Definitely first preference is to delete but I don't oppose restoring if others feel it is necessary. A7V2 (talk) 05:13, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. Normally I would go for Restore and then send to AfD but that "article" seems to be a Speedy Delete G11 candidate that it's just not worth the time. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. ✗plicit 23:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Funker → Terry Funk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete. Term (someone's nickname for him?) does not appear in the target article. Meanwhile, funker has other meanings, like 'one who backs out of something from cowardice', and in German (as in the band name Funker Vogt) 'signaller or radio operator', among other things, but I'm not sure any of them are encyclopedic, so I can't think of an alternative redir target. (Alternatively, I guess someone could source the nickname as in public use in reliable sources and add it to the article?)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "I'm a funker" does seem to be used to express admiration for Terry Funk (e.g. [4]) which I assume is where this comes from. However it isn't mentioned in the target article and it wouldn't be primary usage even if it was. Hut 8.5 17:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 💬 18:52, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• El Bronco (wrestler), Bronco (Dominican wrestler), Bronco (Puerto Rican wrestler) → Ramón Álvarez (wrestler)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I doubt someone would search for this wrestler by typing his ring name three times, with each instance preceding a different parenthetical qualifier.

Note that this redirect was created as part of a request at AFC/RC. The IP most likely wanted to create three separate redirects, but the link was malformed and the reviewer misunderstood the request. If some editor wants to create Bronco (Dominican wrestler) or Bronco (Puerto Rican wrestler) (El Bronco (wrestler) already exists), they are free to do so, but I don't think that this redirect is remotely plausible.

Ping the redirect reviewer @L293D: Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 18:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I have also found this discussion on a similar redirect. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 20:09, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Completely implausible. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:45, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, housekeeping — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngusWOOF (talk • contribs) 22:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 speedy deleted per G8 by Fastily (talk · contribs). -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:16, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:IsaacNewtonSegments → Template:Isaac Newton sidebar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

redirect to deleted template Artem.G (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:CSD G8, though I think that might not apply until the target is deleted itself. Duckmather (talk) 18:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 💬 07:11, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:NOT2 → Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm concerned that any shortcut that starts with WP:NOT might be misinterpreted as a link to the famous core policy. This particular shortcut does not seem to be used presently and does not have any particularly useful feature (such as linking to a section), and I therefore gently suggest that it could probably be deleted without any (apparent) harm, and that there might be a small benefit to deleting it, since there is a chance that not having this shortcut might prevent confusion in the future about whether someone was talking about (e.g.,) the second section of WP:NOT.

(For clarity, I can only demonstrate that this is unused in current pages. I don't know whether it was used in an edit summary or a previous version of a page. I'm fully aware that being unused is not a reason for deletion, but I mention this in case anyone is concerned that deleting it might require any additional work to update pages with new links.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a dictionary, the second entry at WP:NOT. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 12:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• I like Edward-Woodrow's retarget.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:07, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as cryptic. The fact that it's never been naturally linked since it's creation is telling. The sections at WP:NOT are not numbered like, say WP:CSD or WP:CRD, so no one would call the policy that Wikipedia is not a dictionary "NOT2". -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Cryptic, unclear, WTF. Toss it in the trash with extreme prejudice. Steel1943 (talk) 23:36, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unclear. Mathglot (talk) 17:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. ✗plicit 03:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Beautiful language → Aesthetics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Obscure synonym - car chasm (talk) 17:52, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Overly vague to point to this specific place. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 20:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A redirect that no longer makes sense due to deleted target and incorrect retargeting. Softlavender (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Too vague to be useful Carpimaps ^{talk to me!} 01:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unless some philosopher or linguist has made this a term, in which case redirect as appropriate. Otherwise, this is not useful. Fieari (talk) 04:21, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as vague. I found no good alternative targets here at en.wiki. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: As vague. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Artistic language. Jay 💬 20:39, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consideration of the late retarget suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: It does not appear to be a synonym for artistic language. On a side note wikt:Appendix:X is a beautiful language is currently up for deletion on Wiktionary. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 11:37, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, vague. (Was gonna piggy-back a request to add a redirect from Beautiful editor to User:Mathglot; but in the end, thought better of it...). Mathglot (talk) 17:31, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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 between retargeting and keeping. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 05:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Assistant Attorney General → United States Assistant Attorney General  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Assistant attorney general → United States Assistant Attorney General  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Assistant AG → United States Assistant Attorney General  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Retarget all to Attorney general. The United States federal government is hardly the only entity to have assistant attorneys general. In cleaning up incoming links to these redirects, I easily found more than a dozen specifying assistant attorneys general for other jurisdictions. BD2412 T 05:45, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:28, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Set-indexify separately Opposed proposed target given that attorney general doesn't mention assistants at all and doesn't clarify how this differs from a Deputy Attorney General or a solicitor general. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • What would we put in such an index? None of the various states with an "Assistant Attorney General" office have an article on that office. I could see retargeting to Deputy Attorney General, which is the equivalent office. BD2412 T 01:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think Deputy Attorney General would be a suitable target since agencies such as the DOJ have both deputy and assistant AGs. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I misunderstood the nomination statement to mean that we had article content about a dozen other assistant attorney general positions (I missed the part about cleaning up incoming links). I have updated the bolded portion of my comment above. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 03:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all to Attorney general. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Giving it a try to see if a better target arises.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † ^edits 08:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget all to Attorney general per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to U.S. specifics per nominator. The other retarget suggested above is not about assistant so that would obviously be useless to the searcher/wikilinker. Softlavender (talk) 02:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Softlavender: By "Retarget to U.S. specifics per nominator" what did you mean? The nomination is against having the current target which is U.S.-specific. Jay 💬 14:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Oops, thanks, somehow I read that wrong. I will re-vote. Softlavender (talk) 22:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. The retarget suggested is not about assistant so that would obviously be useless to the searcher/wikilinker. Softlavender (talk) 22:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:30, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, no evidence has been provided of notable assistant attorneys general in other jurisdictions. Strong oppose retargeting to Attorney general. "Assistant" is not even mentioned there, guaranteeing that someone looking for information on a specific office will not find it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 05:03, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Sylhet region → Sylhet Division  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This redirect targets to Sylhet Division (Bangladesh) which forms most of Sylhet but it isn't exactly an equivalent of Sylhet "region" which also includes Karimganj district in India. I propose that this be retargeted to History of Sylhet which, in my opinion, is a better target because it emphasises on the entirety of Sylhet region, unlike the division article which is focused on only a part of that region. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:27, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Mehedi Abedin 07:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Reject - In the modern sense, the term 'Sylhet region' is used interchangeably with Sylhet Division. Although the Bangladeshi division of Sylhet does not include the three and a half thanas now part of India, it is still referred to as such but the same cannot be said in the Indian side, where they prefer using terms such as Barak Valley and associating with that as an alternative. UserNumber (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Karimganj district's association with Barak Valley was only a post-partition development. For most of its history, that was not the case. I believe, as a "region" it still forms a part of Sylhet alongside the more specific Sylhet division. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 14:53, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguation seems like the logical conclusion of the nominator's arguments. And from a quick glance, it seems like the vast majority of the numerous incoming links are trying to link to a general article on the region, covering both sides of the border -- not to a historical region or to the present-day division of Bangladesh. Which makes sense, because until 2020 we had exactly such an article. I don't know much about the underlying issues here, but it seems to me that the optimal outcome would be to restore that page, since it covered exactly the primary topic. But disambiguation at least punts this issue back to editors at the article level to determine exactly what the target of each individual link should be (and whether perhaps we should once again have an article on the region as a whole). As an aside, although nobody is proposing deletion at the moment, for the record it should be noted that substantial content from the former Sylhet region page has been incorporated into Sylhet Division. The revision history of Sylhet region must therefore be preserved per WP:COPYWITHIN; I have applied {{copied}} to the source article talk page. -- Visviva (talk) 04:33, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and add hatnotes to Sylhet or Sylhet disambiguation. Add R with history tag. Remove extra entry in the disambiguation page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 22:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A Google news search shows only stuff about Sylhet Division in Bangladesh. The redirect makes sense. A.Musketeer (talk) 00:51, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• List of Sub-Districts of Indonesia → Village  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• List of subdistricts of Indonesia → Districts of Indonesia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• List of villages in Indonesia → Villages of Indonesia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• List of villages of Indonesia → Villages of Indonesia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Misleading redirects in that no such list exists, and one is unlikely to exist on Wikipedia due to there being from hundreds to thousands of villages in each province of the country. Note that the second is a {{R with history}}, though it doesn't seem like any of the former content has remained even directly after the merge. Randi Moth ^Talk_Contribs 18:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget the first two to Districts of Indonesia#List of districts which, contrart to your expectations, does contain such a list. Delete the second two, since no list of villages exists. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are lists of districts rather than subdistricts, which is a synonym of villages as in Villages of Indonesia. If kept, the targets of each of 4 redirects should be kept consistent. Randi Moth ^Talk_Contribs 21:38, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • My reading of Districts_of_Indonesia#Definition is that "district" and "subdistrict" mean the same thing, not that "subdistrict" means "village". * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

      The section says that during the Dutch East Indies and the early republic, "district" referred to kewedanan, which was divided into kecamatan which thus were called subdistricts, then saying that the name "subdistrict" is currently inaccurate since kewedanan were abolished. Villages of Indonesia also supports this by having subdistricts as the synonym for village, them being subdivisions of districts. Randi Moth ^Talk_Contribs 08:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Attribution must be kept if content from here was merged, even if that content is later deleted. J947 † ^edits 00:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  It doesn't seem like any content was merged into the target page. Randi Moth ^Talk_Contribs 08:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Bluesatellite: you redirected List of subdistricts of Indonesia with the edit summary "merged", but where did you merge it to? Jay 💬 14:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I have notified of this discussion at the target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nomination. There was no merge per Randi. Jay 💬 07:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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/disambiguate. No consensus between keeping and disambiguating after three relists, but a consensus against the status quo. (non-admin closure) CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (please mention me on reply) 05:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• White Kingdom → Outer Plane  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate as suggested below, and Keep original edit history at White Kingdom (Dungeons & Dragons) - I added a mention to the article. BOZ (talk) 18:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate or delete no evidence that this is WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT by either usage or significance compared to any of the other WP:DABMENTIONed topics (book by Tiit Aleksejev, play by Herman Voaden, side in Game of the Seven Kingdoms). Given how minor all these things are, it may be better just to show search results. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate The question if this is the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT may be open (though arguably the other cases would fall under The White Kingdom or White kingdom, respectively), but while this advanced search yields proper results, the standard search is quite unhelpful with it's many hits of article somewhere containing "white" and "kingdom", so I don't think deletion is a good option. Daranios (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The standard search works fine. Use quotation marks. Special:Search/~"White Kingdom". 59.149.117.119 (talk) 23:28, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, bad choice of terms: Yes, the search with quotations marks works. But the basic standard search without does not, and I believe that most users will go for that first. So a disambiguation page would have value. Daranios (talk) 10:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate And move the original article to White Kingdom (Dungeons & Dragons) per BOZ. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. There are about a dozen obscure entities with this name that are mentioned in passing here and there on Wikipedia. As far as I can see, none of them are worth creating dab entries for. Better leave navigation to the search engine (yes, it needs the quotation marks to return meaningful results here, but that's the case for every search string that's more than a single word, and I don't think that every multiple-word search phrase should automatically be entitled to a redirect or a dab page on account of this fact). – Uanfala (talk) 12:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate or delete? Also, a disambiguation draft will help in the discussion. BOZ had already moved the original edit history to White Kingdom (Dungeons & Dragons) on April 13.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Here's a first Draft:White Kingdom. Daranios (talk) 15:43, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• A dab would have been nice if there were couple of articles with the title. The entries at the drafted dab are akin to search results, and do not provide additional value per Uanfala. Delete, but if not deleted, we should not have the status quo because of the ambiguity. Jay 💬 07:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete per Uanfala. Very sympathetic to that search results are extremely unhelpful for multi-word terms (White people in the United Kingdom!), and the vast majority of readers don't know how to use quote marks in a search or wouldn't think to anyway, but any content on White Kingdoms is extremely limited. In my opinion, just one White Kingdom on the site meets DABMENTION: Tiit Aleksejev's The White Kingdom, which includes the definite article. And maybe the Game of the Seven Kingdoms kingdom, but I don't think people would very often search up one of seven sides in a board game at all. J947 † ^edits 07:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last relist, given that we now have a drafted disambiguation page and !votes made since then have swung towards deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:12, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).