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 Independiente. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:37, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Independientes → Philippine Independent Church  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Does not unambiguously refer to the subject, as it just means "independents" in Spanish. It wouldn't be appropriate to point at Independent candidate (the target of the corresponding page on es.wiki) on WP:RLOTE grounds, and I'm not sure this is a good case for disambiguation. Deletion to allow for internal search results seems best to me right now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 03:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, the term "independiente" is also used in the Tagalog article to refer to the Philippine Independent Church. But I doubt that the redirect target is the WP:PTOPIC here. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:32, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 08:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Independiente. I'll add the entry about the church there. --Lenticel ^(talk) 11:15, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  That's a good suggestion, and I'm kicking myself a bit for not thinking of it before coming here. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Independiente per Lenticel. Looks like a reasonable {{r from plural}} to me. – Scyrme (talk) 11:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Independiente per Lenticel. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Independiente per Lenticel and thanks for adding the DAB entry. Skynxnex (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Independiente per Lenticel. The term is ambiguous, and the DAB page listed here. MusiBedrock (talk) 10:46, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Independiente per Lenticel. As the creator of the redirect, it makes more sense to me now. Thank you for adding the DAB entry. Nuwordlife0rder (talk) 10:04, 10 January 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. Jay 💬 15:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Kawasockie → Kawasaki  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I could judge this as an implausible typo. Also, user has a history of creating redirects that were deleted for being implausible typos or violating WP:FORRED. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 21:01, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom's findings --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:50, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Plausible phonetic typo. Steel1943 (talk) 14:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Steel1943: Yes, but then, should we also have redirects like Kawasokki or Kawasocky? We could have endless redirects for every possible misspelling, like "Eurpe" for Europe. Heavy Water (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Heavy Water: See WP:PANDORA: It's an argument made at WP:RFD sometimes, but also an argument that usually is not supported since it deals with hypotheticals. In other words, since this redirect exists, it is harmless, and the odds that such a redirect will encourage the creation of other such redirects are both incredibly low ... but if other redirects are created, they would each be dealt with individually. (Also, it's not like this redirect is spelled in a slanderous way or anything like that, like "Kawasockittooya".) Steel1943 (talk) 13:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a plausible misspelling. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:39, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete See reply to Steel1943 above, its existence is an abuse of the redirect policy. Heavy Water (talk) 04:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Redirects should not be there to replace the WP search engine. Or brain. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:49, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There's no need to guess at hypothetical spellings when we can look them up to see if there's any evidence of actual use. I did a quick search for "kawasockie", "kawasockie", and "kawasokki" on Google. Only the first two turned up relevant results; most were confined to a small handful of old posts on forums, all referring to Kawasaki motorcycles and engines. However, "kawasockie" also turned up a PDF of a 1976 edition of the Wright State Guardian, a newspaper, which includes a classified ad for a "kawasockie" motorcycle. This suggests that it may be plausible, albiet uncommon. (It could just be a humourous deliberate misspelling or in-joke among enthusiasts though, like misspelling dog as doge in memes; the scant uses I found didn't give much to go on beyond confirming that some usage exists.) – Scyrme (talk) 23:53, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Perhaps the strongest argument is that https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?fulltext=1&search=kawasockie&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1 doesn't seem to bring up the redirect destination. At the same time, it's still a weak one, since WP:RPURPOSE says "likely misspellings" not "any verifiable misspellings". --Joy (talk) 09:27, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Deletesockie per Heavy Water and Kashmiri. Not mentioned in the target. MusiBedrock (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Umm... misspellings are usually never mentioned in an article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:03, 9 January 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. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Berbers in Sudan → Berbers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Proposed deletion, as Berbers have never lived in Sudan. Munfarid1 (talk) 13:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Note that "Sudan" is also the name of a region that is much larger than the present country of that name. The geography of that region has some minor overlaps with the homeland of the Tuareg people, who are themselves classified as Berber. (Compare the maps at Tuareg people and Sudan (region).) I'm not sure how to apply that to this redirect discussion, as there is a minor connection but with several degrees of separation. I do find the search term to be unlikely. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:10, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep due to the minor overlaps between the Tuareg people and Berber as explained above. CycloneYoris ^talk! 18:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom as misleading and unhelpful. If it is the Tuareg people who are the subject, then that should have been the redirect, but there is no indication of Sudan at that article. No mention of Berbers at Sudan (region). Sudan talks about Tunjur people who were Arabised Berbers, but there is no mention of Berbers at Tunjur people. Jay 💬 18:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there is no mention of the region Sudan or the Tuareg in the redirect, but only Berbers and Sudan. This is misleading to anyone who comes across this redirect, for example when searching for Sudan. IMHO, there is no advantage to keeping misleading information. That's why I started this proposal. Munfarid1 (talk) 09:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No affinity for specific country. MusiBedrock (talk) 09:01, 7 January 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

• Tafseer-e-Daryabadi → Tafseer-e-Majidi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I'm not sure if this is a plausible search term as it seems to be part of the title of a book and part of the author's name. MB 05:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Harmless and unambiguous. CycloneYoris ^talk! 18:12, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep unless it is wrong. The same applies to the current target title Tafseer-e-Majidi which also is part title of a book and part author's name. The article doesn't say who gave it that title, and I don't know why the article is at that title. Jay 💬 17:58, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not many people seem to use this name, but it accurately describes the book as a tafsir of Abdul Majid Daryabadi. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:41, 24 January 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. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Otome chic → Otomechikku  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Not mentioned in page; as far as I can tell the style isn't called that and "chikku" has no relation to "chic". Rusalkii (talk) 04:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, "chic" is a misinterpretation - "-chikku" is a katakanization of the English "-tic" (as in "dramatic").--Alexandra^IDV 09:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:32, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a plausible alternate spelling of the subject. silvia (User:BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 20:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Confusing search term. Someone without basic knowledge of the Japanese language would not be able to decipher this. CycloneYoris ^talk! 17:59, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I don't see how it is a plausible alternate spelling. An external search only brings up a song by Oresama for which we don't have an article. Jay 💬 17:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Chic in English is normally pronounced /ˈʃik/, not /ˈtʃɪk/. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:35, 24 January 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. The nomination was made for a move to a title which was subsequently created while the discussion was in progress. Participants wanted to keep the existing redirect title as well. Jay 💬 17:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Foster (2023 film) → List of Blue Sky Studios productions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Please move this page to Foster (cancelled film) because the film was cancelled as a result of Blue Sky Studios being permanently closed. 99.209.40.250 (talk) 16:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per WP:G3 (which I've just tagged) Delete as the 2023 release date was apparently false; a move would be unnecessary IMO, since there's no history worth preserving. Without prejudice to creating the other redirect mentioned above. N.b. I've tagged this redirect since it was missing the RfD tag. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep: The movie is not coming out in 2023, but this does seem to be getting some usage implying that some people think it is coming out in 2023, even if it is incorrect, so at {{R from incorrect name}}. Foster (cancelled film) can be created to List of Blue Sky Studios productions#Cancelled films. TartarTorte 13:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep: I agree with TartarTorte. This redirect just needs {{R from incorrect name}}. Cardei012597 (talk) 16:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep: I agree with Cardei. AnthonyN090 (talk) 17:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per TartarTorte. A7V2 (talk) 06:30, 9 January 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 💬 17:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Kt faber → Katherine Faber  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

K. T. Faber makes sense since this is how she's presented in papers, but this is an unlikely capitalization/punctuation. Rusalkii (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I just created K. T. Faber, so this seems like a costly redirect to me. Someone-123-321 (talk) 02:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete too many miscaps to be plausible --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, multiple errors. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:08, 8 January 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 delete. WP:CSD G7. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 03:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Suit-kovia → Marvel Studios: Assembled#Reception  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Refers to an obscure joke briefly mentioned in a documentary special. Hard to imagine anyone who would be interested in searching for this term, zero pageviews in the past 30 days, and two news results on Google Search (one of which is a primary source). InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:58, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: As the creator of this redirect, I don't care if it is deleted. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete If only WP:CFSD applied to redirects as well... Someone-123-321 (talk) 02:06, 6 January 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).