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. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Michael Zazarino → I Should Have Never Gone Ziplining  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Redirect for NN voice actor to the one role he had. Please consider this a nomination for Michael zazarino as well. Toddst1 (talk) 22:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both per the nomination statement. In addition, these redirects were created after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Zazarino (2nd nomination) was closed as "delete", not "delete and redirect". Peacock (talk) 19:30, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP Actually, Michael Zazarino was originally closed as a redirect, which is why I made it one (even though I originally crafter a well researched, and properly referenced article on Michael). Michael has also appeared on other shows FYI. A quick trip to IMDb will inform you of this. I originally made a page for Michael because I am a big fan of South Park, and I wanted to contribute to the Wikipedia community. South Park is one of the most widely watched shows in the world. The live action episode was one of the most unique episodes ever created (as the show is a cartoon). Michael played Stan Marsh. This a character that is recognized by name all over the world. Michael was the lead of the show that episode (as he did the most acting out of all of the live action actors), and the entire crux of the show based on the live action scenes. These were fully acted, long scenes, with heavy dialogue, as well as a monologue delivered by Michael. This was a major part. There were articles about the live action on Huffington Post, IGN, AV Club, Thrillist, and International Business Times, as well as an interview with the creators of South Park (Trey Parker and Matt Stone) about the casting and use of live action on the South Park. To emphasize, Stan Marsh which is one of the most well known fictional cartoon characters ever created and he was played in live action form by Michael Zazarino. Fans of the show have a right to know who this is if they research Michael or the episode on Wikipedia without their results turning up blank. Why would you want to take that away from fans of the show or anyone else who is curious about finding out more about an actor who played the lead character on a major show? What is the point of removing an actor who has appeared on one of the largest shows in the world, as one of the most well known characters in the world? Especially when the episode is still CURRENTLY being replayed on Comedy Central as well as being streamed on major platforms such as Hulu. I honestly do not think the editors who have voted to delete this redirect or my past article have seen the live action episode of South Park, and therefore they are naive and don't understand what it was. Maybe they think it was a small voice over role? If you have not seen the episode, and you have voted to delete this article, please actually WATCH it to understand. It is not a cartoon. It is real people, really acting, and really doing scenes. As some of the biggest cartoon characters in the world with Michael playing Stan Marsh. Not just a quick appearance, but actually doing full scenes with a story arc. This is NOT a voice actor and it was not voice acting. This was LIVE ACTION acting on one of the worlds best known cartoons which is why it was so special and such a big deal. Please actually watch the episode and don't just assume you know what it is. SouthParkFan2017 (talk) 03:23, 5 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding comment by SouthParkFan2017 (talk • contribs) who has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 03:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I will say Keep because I would imagine it is useful for users who find themselves looking this actor up for whatever reason to be directed to the page that most closely represents him. ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-^☖ 19:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The problem is that the article presents nothing about Zazarino's career here. He only appears in the one episode. He wasn't the creator of the episode or in a place where some biography can be written in a section of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note that if any of his live-action portrayal can be detailed in a section, it could be redirected to the Stan Marsh article as WP:BLP1E. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SouthParkFan2017 can you write up a live-action portrayal section in Stan Marsh's article? If there are so many news articles about his work there as you presented, they can go there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Michael Zazarino's only credit of note on Wikipedia is this episode, and the episode does the best job of describing his role in the episode. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:17, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 no consensus. Just..absolutely no consensus for anything. Evenly split among three different possible targets. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Flag salute → Bellamy salute  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This is a very american-centric redirect and if someone searches for the poem, Flag Salute but types Flag salute instead, they will end up at the wrong article, with Flag salute being an obscure synonym for the Bellamy Salute. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. Toddst1 (talk) 00:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to "Flag Salute", with hatnote pointing to current target.— PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 01:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete WP:REDLINK to encourage creation of an article about flag salutes in different countries (instead of what's effectively an WP:INUSA redirect). Flag Salute is not a good target, per WP:DIFFCAPS. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since there seems to be resistance to deletion, retarget to Salute#Civilian salutes (since that section is almost entirely about flags) and hatnote the poem there. Neither page views nor incoming links nor usage of the phrase in Google Books support that the poem is WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for lower-case "salute". 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:07, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to "Flag Salute" per PinkAmpers&.―Matthew J. Long -Talk-^☖ 21:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Flag Salute per User:PinkAmpersand --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:05, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Odd to call something "american-centric" and recommend retargeting it to an American poem. The IP's suggestion has some merit, but civilians aren't the only ones who salute flags, and pointing to just plain Salute doesn't seem very helpful. Since it's linked in the first line of the target article anyway, I really don't see a problem here. --BDD (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Plenty of pages are differentiated by capitalization: a hatnote all that is needed. Nom is predicated on the unsupported assertion that it's "an obscure synonym". I find that hard to believe when Bellamy salute absolutely crushes Flag Salute in page views. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Salute#Civilian salutes which detail how salutes to different flags in various countries are handled. Hatnote to the poem and Bellamy if needed. When people are looking up salutes they might think the regular military salute is appropriate for the flag as well. They'll also see the sentence "In the United States, civilians may salute the U.S. flag by placing their right hand over their heart or by standing at attention during the playing of the national anthem or while reciting the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance, or when the flag is passing by, as in a parade." The hand over heart and standing at attention (or kneeling if you're protesting) is a lot more common for saluting. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Salute#Civilian salutes per AngusWOOF and hatnote to the poem. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 17:14, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Are any other salutes other than the Bellamy salute known as "flag salute"? Per Bellamy salute: "During the period when it was used with the Pledge of Allegiance, it was sometimes known as the "flag salute". It seems to me that it would be acceptable as a {{R from alternative name}}. To address the search term argument that the nominator brought up, when searching using the term "flag salute" on Wikipedia, I find its use most often as a synonym for the Bellamy salute. It's mentioned in a couple of U.S. Supreme Court cases, including West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette as well as in Pledge of Allegiance (United States). That being said, I can see it useful as a search term looking for salutes to flags in general. If it is decided to retarget to Salute, I would prefer not to refine it to a certain section. There are other parts of the article that mention a salute to a flag (eg: Indonesia Salute) as saluting flags is not limited to civilian use. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:31, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. It was "sometimes" known as the "flag salute"? Citation needed. More like commonly. The Google Ngram doesn't even find the so-called "Bellamy salute". "Flag salute" first appeared around the time of the American Civil War. The 1901 Journal of the ... National Convention of the Woman's Relief Corps documents the use of the flag salute in several states. Descriptions of the Hand Flag Salute and Oral Flag Salute, ca. 1917. I haven't found any contemporary references calling it the "Bellamy salute"; that term seems to only have come into use in historical accounts of the period, such as this August 2016 Smithsonian piece. Even recent history books still call it the flag salute. Salute is linked from the lead sentence of Bellamy salute, though the term "flag salute" does not appear in that article. So readers can find the more general uses of the term. Confess I was not aware of this piece of US history until now (though I am quite familiar with the Nazi salute); I found it interesting. It's worth preserving and not obscuring by redirects to articles that only give "dictionary definition" coverage at best. Standing at attention and putting my hand over my heart is not an activity I associate with the term "salute". – wbm1058 (talk) 23:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See also Pledge of Allegiance (United States) § Salute. Bellamy came a few years after the Balch salute (George Balch). wbm1058 (talk) 00:24, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I found some contemporary uses. Typically in quotes; sometimes qualified by the term "so-called", or "for some years was known as the". But in general use, especially by the early 1940s, it was simply "the" flag salute, no qualifier needed to distinguish Bellamy's from the other salute(s). wbm1058 (talk) 00:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hand over the heart redirects to List of gestures, where the only sighting of the word "heart" is in hand heart. Not strongly associated with salute. wbm1058 (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 Create a new article at the place. Per CoffeeWithMarkets' proposal. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades^Godric 10:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Crime in Puerto Rico → Illegal drugs in Puerto Rico  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I clicked on this link looking for information about the Puerto Rican criminal justice system, and instead found this. It's a seven-year-old article that was at this title for a full two years before being moved, so I'm slightly hesitant to delete it, but ultimately I think that's what would be best, per WP:REDLINK; if anything, the relatively high traffic will make it that much more likely that an article be created. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 17:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - As stated by the nominator, this redirect which I once created is no longer needed and therefore should be deleted. The redirect was created in the first place because someone had written about the subject "Crime in Puerto Rico" indicating that "drugs" was the only criminal factor, which is not true and as such was redirected to the article "Illegal drugs in Puerto Rico". Since crime in Puerto Rico is not limited to illegal drugs, then the redirect no longer makes any sense. Tony the Marine (talk) 17:19, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Puerto Rico#Crime unless someone vouches for the need of a WP:REDLINK incentive for article creation. – Uanfala (talk) 23:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:REDLINK, nom, and @Marine 69-71. —Ahnoneemoos (talk) 00:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:REDLINK --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:REDLINK _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 15:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Uanfala. More information would be helpful there, but that could be said about almost anything. And presumably more content would need to be added at that section before thought was given to a standalone article again anyway. --BDD (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Uanfala - a section exists on the topic, so a redirect there makes sense. Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Reverse redirect. The article used to be about "crime in Puerto Rico" with a heavy emphasis on illegal drugs. It was moved probably because of this emphasis, but I don't think it needs to be blown up and start anew (ala WP:REDLINK). There are still plenty of signs the article was originally about crime in general, chief among them include the infobox that has nothing specifically to do with illegal drugs as well as sections on gangs and police corruption. Perhaps there can be a few more sections regarding non-drug related crime, but I do feel the current article would be the place to add that information, especially seeing that the current article is currently <20kb. Looking at the final revision before the page move, there was a section on political corruption that could be re-added, for example. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I would support this as well. The target article is currently the only article for "Illegal drugs in" [place]; if we don't reverse, perhaps it should be moved to the more standard Illegal drug trade in Puerto Rico. --BDD (talk) 15:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• At the risk of making an even further mess of things, I went ahead and created 'Crime within Puerto Rico' so that we had something that functions as a general concept article. I propose that its content be swapped with 'Crime in Puerto Rico' so that said page is no longer a redirect at all. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 22:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @CoffeeWithMarkets: Am I correct in my understanding of RfD policy, in thinking that you're allowed to make that move yourself right now and moot the entire RfD? Because if so, I'd say that's what you should do. Your article looks great! @Marine 69-71: Any thoughts? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 00:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:32, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Eurosocialism → Social democracy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned anywhere in the target, so the reader looking for a definition of the term is left none the wiser. Could be a soft redirect to Wiktionary. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Given the commentary that uses the specific term "Eurosocialism", might this be a case of WP:REDLINK? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was previously an article, so restoring that might be a better solution if the consensus is that the topic is likely to be notable. My sense though is that it isn't. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The term "Eurosocialism" returns only 3,840 Google hits, which is very little for what is supposed to be a Europe-wide ideology with a huge following, and I don't think there is a real ideology called "Eurosocialism". The original version of this article was just WP:OR based on American oversimplifications and misconceptions about social democracy in Europe, that failed to distinguish between social democracy and what is usually referred to as socialism in Europe. --Tataral (talk) 20:31, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:31, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 2018 flu pandemic → 2017–18 United States flu season  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There is no flu "pandemic" right now in 2018, so there is no reason to keep this title. Presently, the flu may be endemic in the United States, but not around the world. –MPWikiEdits (questions?) 15:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This page need not be deleted. If this redirect page could be moved to a proper title such as "2018 American flu endemic" or even "2018 flu endemic", that would be acceptable. –MPWikiEdits (questions?) 17:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Keep per WP:CHEAP as a useful search term, consistent with other flu seasons. The page was inappropriately deleted as {{db-g7}}. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:GLOBALIZE and/or WP:XY. Some of you may have noticed that influenza also occurs outside the United States. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:37, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Misleading redirect._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete should redirect to a worldwide article or nowhere PriceDL (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply - If there is no other article about a 2017 nor 2018 flu pandemic, then this redirect should remain. Otherwise, we can change the name of the target article to "2017–18 flu season". --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete misleading for 2 reasons: 1. The article it links to is only about the US, despite the fact that "pandemic" means worldwide. 2. Regardless of the globalization issues, there is no flu pandemic in 2018, so the redirect title is something that doesn't exist, with redirects to a very different thing that does exist. Tornado chaser (talk) 19:44, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also I just saw that the {{influenza}} template falsely lists 2018 as a pandemic year due to this redirect. Tornado chaser (talk) 16:28, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Jax has decided to add his redirect to the navbox. I've reverted. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So thats why I didn't see 2018 when I tried to edit the navbox. Tornado chaser (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 Type 0. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Type-0 → Final Fantasy Type-0  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Too confusing with the blood type "O". _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Type 0, a disambiguation page. While I don't think there would be much confusion, I've added it to the see also. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:59, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Type 0 like Tavix said. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Type 0 per Tavix --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:28, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• REtarget to type 0 dab page -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 05:37, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 Final Fantasy video games. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy PS3 → Final Fantasy XIII  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Misleading, as there is more than one Final Fantasy game on the PS3 system. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of Final Fantasy video games, where games available on the PS3 are listed. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 16:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of Final Fantasy video games as that is where the PlayStation 3 games in the series are listed. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 23:09, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ffx3 → Final Fantasy XIII  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Ff-x3 → Final Fantasy XIII  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Final Fantasy X3 → Final Fantasy XIII  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

"x3" is a really, really weird way of writing "13", making this redirect implausible. Also confusing and misleading, as there is a Final Fantasy X-2._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete per nominator. WP:R#D8 implausible synonym for the target. The possibility of Final Fantasy X-3 as a sequel to X-2 is mentioned briefly at Final Fantasy X#Legacy, but I don't think these are likely search terms for that, given their spacing/formatting. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Final Fantasy X3 / ff-x3 since that is confusing, as it implies it is a sequel to Final Fantasy X-2 -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 05:41, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment "ffx3" should mean things about FFX, such as Firefox 3. So it should redirect to Mozilla Firefox -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 05:41, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still overly confusing. It could refer to "Final Fantasy X 3", "Final Fantasy 13" or "Firefox 3", but is ultimately more confusing than necessary._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: "X3" is not a plausible way to write 13 and is not mentioned at the disambiguation page X3. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 19:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:26, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• SG100 → Singapore  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Comment on redirect: ", #SG100 is used to celebrate the 50 years after SG50, the time from Singapore (between: 9 August 2015 and 9 August 2065)." This violates WP:CRYSTAL, but is there otherwise a good reason to keep this redirect? feminist (talk) 13:04, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no mention of centennial celebrations planned for 47 years from now in the article. Could be confused with the proper notation for 100 Singaporean dollars. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it could also be a typo for SG-1000 -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 05:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• But probably not a useful typo, like SG1000 might be if it weren't a redlink. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:31, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy VII wiki → Final Fantasy VII  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Pointless, self-referential redirect that is unnecessary. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:11, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete there's an FFVII Wikia site, but it isn't discussed at the target or anywhere else in Wikipedia, and shouldn't be given its lack of reliable-source coverage. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I agree. This doesn't seem useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The target is not or is not about a Final Fantasy VII wiki. Steel1943 (talk) 17:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:51, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 17:03, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Fainaru Fantajii IV → Final Fantasy IV  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete as no one will literally search for the romanization of the title. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:57, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:FORRED, considering that this is apparently the romanization of the Japanese title. Steel1943 (talk) 13:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Enough results when searching to suggest romanization used often enough to keep. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:48, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This romanization clearly has some currency. I'll grant that no one seems to be searching for this term with any regularity, but IMHO this still falls under WP:CHEAP. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 02:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• HuainaruhuantaziIV → Final Fantasy IV  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Again with the weird romanizations. It's obvious this is an implausible redirect. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Eubot mistranscription garbage (turning ファ Fa into Hua). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 00:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy Iii → Final Fantasy III  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Highly implausible. Why would someone type one uppercase "I" and then two lowercase? _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I suppose somebody, somewhere, might do this. But I really don't believe that the redirect is worth keeping. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy 3j → Final Fantasy III  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Final Fantasy IIIj → Final Fantasy III  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Apparently someone used the name as shorthand for the Japanese exclusive version of the game. However, it appears to be a non-notable neologism. Unnecessary - delete. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:48, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. These were common terms used to distinguish Final Fantasy III US (aka Final Fantasy VI) and Final Fantasy III on the NES in an earlier era. Redirects don't have to be "notable", just useful. SnowFire (talk) 08:59, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless you can find a source that says that, and add it to the article, that is just WP:OR or hearsay._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Please see WP:RFD#KEEP #5, "it's useful." Redirects are more flexible than article content with a much weaker standard for inclusion. As far as sources, a simple Google search should suffice. SnowFire (talk) 20:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep yeah, anecdotally a decade ago it was not uncommon to refer to the game released in the US as "Final fantasy 3" and the actual game by that name released solely in Japan as "Final Fantasy 3j", since many people wouldn't immediately recognize "Final Fantasy 6" since no such game by that name had been released in the US. Redirects do not need sources in order to justify themselves. --PresN 18:58, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 00:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy 3. → Final Fantasy III  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Why does this even exist? Period is "point"-less. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The full stop makes this an unlikely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 13:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely typo and unused stylization. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:33, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Killiondude (talk) 00:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• PSN (Download) → PlayStation Network  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Very strangely disambiguated redirect. Seems unnecessary. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, download is almost always a verb. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 19:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 no consensus. No prejudice towards turning Celeris into a disambiguation page. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:19, 20 January 2018 (UTC) Amendment: someone has turned Celeris into a stub on the company, which I did not notice; it is now moot I guess. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:24, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Celeris → Virtual Pool  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Celeris Inc → Virtual Pool  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]  Added during the second relist by -- Tavix ^(talk)

Delete. A game company should not redirect to one of the titles it produces. They've made other games, such as FlixMix.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  17:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Article gives the most information concerning Celeris including a note on FlixMix. Also, the article covers the franchise of products and assumes this is their most notable product. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:39, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• There is also the mythological figure of that name mentioned at Equuleus. – Uanfala (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! Should this be a dab then? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:42, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Virtual Pool is the only notable game the studio has developed so it's the appropriate redirect target. --Mika1h (talk) 21:55, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uh, that's stark-obviously not true. Repeat: FlixMix.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  13:57, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: FlixMix is tagged for notability since 2012, but Virtual Pool is not. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. It's not like Virtual Pool is a household name. Maybe it's more notable than FlixMix, and certainly has a better article, but if there's more than one article it could point to, it's time to sink or swim. Standalone article or redlink. (Not that there couldn't be another option, such as targeting a parent company, but we'd have to find it first.) --BDD (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both - I understand that the company has produced more than one video game series, yes, but just a little bit of searching shows how the firm is totally defined by the Virtual Pool series. It alone has received widespread attention and remains of some notice years and years after it first was released. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per BDD and WP:XY. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:23, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Paper machete → Papier-mâché  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Papier machete → Papier-mâché  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This was deleted in 2016 at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Paper machete, but then got recreated several months later off an AFC request, on the purported grounds that this is a "common" misspelling. But firstly, I can find little evidence that it's a common misspelling -- I find far more Google hits for it as the deliberately punny name of a non-notable Soundcloud band than as a misspelled reference to papier maché -- and secondly, even if some person somewhere does think it's spelled this way, typing it into the search bar will have brought up the article the person was looking for before they actually have to type that implausible t. So there's just no genuine need for it. Bearcat (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Unless I'm misunderstanding something here, it looks like we can just speedily delete both per G4, which applies to the former for obvious reasons and to the latter as a "sufficiently identical cop[y]" of the former. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both - I expect that if we just let the RFD process go through than it will be unanimously decided. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both per nom. Machete isn't a plausible alternative spelling for Mache. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Paper machete to paper cutter, delete the other. I don't buy that this is a common misspelling for papier-mâché, even if it's brutally Anglicized. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any news articles that support this concept? I'm seeing more for some show called The Paper Machete in Chicago. [1] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:10, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 no consensus, but no prejudice against renomination of any individual or batch from the group of 68. (Renominating the entire group would seem ill-advised.) --BDD (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• People of Acara → Adjarians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

A Neelix combinatorial explosion for RfD to chew on. No opinion on the correct result beyond that it should be discussed Tazerdadog (talk) 01:50, 10 January 2018 (UTC) Full list: [reply]

• Comment: One of the redirects listed in this discussion, People of Achara, is mentioned in one of the hatnotes on the target page. Steel1943 (talk) 13:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• This badly needs to be split up as the redirects vary greatly in plausibility. For example, both 'Peoples of Acara' and 'People of Acara' are extremely reasonable, one of them even being explicitly mentioned in the target page as stated above. If we take this as an all or nothing situation, then I hope that we don't delete this block of redirects. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  This is definitely not an all-or nothing situation, some of the redirects are certainly appropriate - that said the combinatorial explosion is too big for me to safely conclude that they all are, and they seem similar enough that they are most efficiently discussed together. I'm looking to figure out where the line is between appropriate and excessive with this discussion. Tazerdadog (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Preliminary thoughts:
  1. Unfortunately all of the spelling variants of Adjara seem plausible, in that they make hundreds or thousands of appearances in Google Books; however, some of the "Autonomous Republic of Adjara" variants may be implausible. See hidden table below for details.
  2. "Person of" and "Persons of" are a bit silly
  3. "Peoples of" should not be redirecting to a single ethnic group in a multi-ethnic region. Demographics of Adjara points to Adjara#Population.

Also, I WP:BOLDly corrected #52-#68 (should be "Persons of", were duplicates of #35-#51 "Person of"). Cheers, 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:35, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 Disambiguate.

• Redirect PSP 2 to PSP2
• Disambig PSP2
• Redirect Psp2 to PSP2

(non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:46, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• PSP 2 → PlayStation Vita  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

• PSP2 → Phantasy Star Portable 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

• Psp2 → PlayStation Portable  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

Unclear whether this refers to the PSP-2000 model, the PSP Go or the PS Vita. Too vague to be a redirect. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:44, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment adding PSP2 and Psp2, since they've all been jerked around back and forth between Phantasy Star Portable 2 and other targets multiple times without discussion. These should probably either point to the same place or get deleted together. Also, the protein RBM14 lists PSP2 as an alias. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 12:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate, using PSP2 as the base title and redirecting the other redirects there. At the least, the disambiguation page should include Phantasy Star Portable 2 and RBM14. However, if these are the only two titles that match the nominated acronym (I consider "PSP2" in reference to PlayStation Vita as a {{R from incorrect name}} and in reference to PlayStation Portable as a failed WP:CRYSTAL), then instead weak retarget to RBM14 with a hatnote pointing to Phantasy Star Portable 2. Steel1943 (talk) 15:14, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate as suggested. No clear primary topic for this abbreviation. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:12, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate using PSP2 and redirect all other versions to the dab page, per above. The listing should include List of PaintShop Pro releases, because Paint Shop Pro was frequently known as PSP before the current topics existed. -- 70.52.11.217 (talk) 05:21, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• PlayStation Vita homebrew → PlayStation Vita  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• PS Vita homebrew → PlayStation Vita  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The article says nothing about homebrew software. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:42, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 and refine to PlayStation Portable#Sales. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:21, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• PlayStation Portable piracy → PlayStation Portable  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Wikipedia does not promote piracy therefore this redirect shouldn't exist. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:35, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Wikipedia doesn't promote murder for hire either. PlayStation Portable piracy exists, and there's enough reliable sources on the topic to write at least an article section and make this a {{R to section}} (see e.g. Talk:PlayStation Portable/Archive 5#Piracy; there's more going back as far as 2005). OTOH I would understand deleting this if no one actually steps up to write that section, since the target does not mention the word "piracy" right now (it did in the past). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 09:52, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep now that it is mentioned at the target, thanks to Galobtter. Might be best to leave it pointing at the top of the article rather than pointing to a section, since more information about piracy might go in any number of sections (e.g. Emulation, Custom firmware, etc.) 59.149.124.29 (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Perhaps targeted to #Sales. Absolutely ridiculous nom - in no way is piracy being promoted; enough sources are there that a section could be written; not sure if in general a section is deserved, seeing that other consoles don't have a section. But I added a sentence to sales based on one of the references. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:09, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - And I believe that we should refine things to go specifically to PlayStation_Portable#Sales, as mentioned above, and that section should probably be expanded with more reliable source coverage on the piracy issue. There's a nuanced article from Arstechnica.com on it. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:54, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 Speedy Delete, R3. by User:Writ_Keeper Lenticel ^(talk) 02:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Pay$tation Portable → PlayStation Portable  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Violates WP:NPOV. Pointless redirect. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:33, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:RNEUTRAL says if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, but this one isn't used in any reliable sources as far as I can see. It was created as a result of page-move vandalism, and gets almost no views. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We have redirects that are pejorative; after all, 'Tricky Dick' goes to Richard Nixon's page as it should. However, this particular redirect is, as stated above, an obscure thing not really used by reliable sources. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete should have been deleted years ago. I've sent this to CSD and referred to this thread. If the pejorative is still actively used or article has a section warranting such, then reconsider. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:03, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Flash 0 → PlayStation Portable  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Too vague to redirect to any specific article. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:32, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - My first thought is that this was something to do with Flash (superhero), huh. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not mentioned in the article. Searches for Flash 0 refer to a non-notable Flash Zero band, "The Flash #0" prequel for The Flash by Francis Manapul [2], articles on Adobe Flash Zero-Day vulnerability, AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to vagueness --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:01, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 02:16, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Firmware 4.00 → PlayStation Portable  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Too vague to redirect to any specific article. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nominator. Lots of things have a firmware 4.00. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:56, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I agree. As stated above, this is too vague to be useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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