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 agreement to delete or on an alternate target. Jay 💬 06:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Hylland's theorem → Aanund Hylland  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The target article is a straight biography and contains no mentions of his theorems whatsoever, meaning in contexts like Gibbard's theorem ("Gibbard's theorem is itself generalized by Gibbard's 1978 theorem and Hylland's theorem..."), the reader clicks the redirect expecting to find discussion of his theorems and instead receives nothing at all. This violates the Principle of Least Astonishment. 2603:8001:4542:28FB:D1A0:7BBB:E6CF:5C27 (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2023 (UTC) (Send talk messages here instead)[reply]

• I have notified the creator RobLa, in case he has an opinion. Jay 💬 11:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I put the redirect and a talk-page comment in place in hopes that someone who knows more about "Hylland's theorem" (e.g. those that glibly mention it in the "Allan Gibbard" and "Gibbard's theorem" articles) might actually elaborate. Alas, there hasn't been any activity, even in my response to my May 2022 comment on the "Aanund Hylland" talk page. There's a wiki that I'm heavily involved with ("electowiki") from which I try to link heavily to English Wikipedia articles, and I think I created the English Wikipedia redirect when I created a counterpart to the page ( here: https://electowiki.org/wiki/Hylland's_theorem ), which used to link to the English Wikipedia redirect. I've since added a link on electowiki to the presumed first paper published by Aanund Hylland in 1980. "Hylland's theorem" may be more commonly known as "Hylland free riding", which is also glibly mentioned in many places on English Wikipedia ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Hylland%20free%20riding ). It would be handy if the redirect stayed intact, since hopefully Cunningham's law will kick in, and someone will actually flesh out what they mean by "Hylland's theorem" on the "Aanund Hylland" page. That's my theory/hope. -- RobLa (talk) 04:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Either delete or redirect to Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem instead, and cover all the related (but fuzzily-delineated) theorems in one place. See Talk:Gibbard–Satterthwaite_theorem#Duplicate — Omegatron (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It would seem odd to consolidate these under Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem, since all of these are derived from Gibbard's theorem from 1973. Gibbard's theorem applies to cardinal voting, and was an important generalization of Arrow's impossibility theorem, and is probably more notable than the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem. -- RobLa (talk) 22:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 retarget to Sexual dimorphism. Jay 💬 19:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Male anatomy → Anatomy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Female anatomy → Sex differences in human physiology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Considering that neither of these redirects seem to have a clear subject to redirect them to individually, the fact that they do not target the same target is a bit odd. In regards to Female anatomy specifically, the current target just seems completely erroneous since the topic of "anatomy" is not exclusive to humans. From what I found when trying to find an article they both may refer to, the best I could find is Sexual dimorphism, but even that may not be correct as the article is not specifically about "anatomy". Steel1943 (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC

@Steel1943: Yes, the target of this redirect page shouldn't be specific to human anatomy. This section would be better, since it describes the anatomical features of females. Jarble (talk) 16:48, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sexual dimorphism is about morphology, of which anatomy is a part, so I think that's a fine target, avoiding a human-centric bias without leading readers somewhere astonishing. Retarget. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|she) 19:11, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget each to Sexual dimorphism per Tamzin. Retargeting to Male or Female would make sense, but neither discuss anatomy in a way that would likely satisfy a searcher. ― Synpath 23:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget each to Sexual dimorphism per Tamzin. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 retarget to Vertebrate#Anatomy and morphology and keep the second redirect which already targets there. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Vertebrate anatomy → Anatomy#Vertebrate anatomy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Anatomy of vertebrates → Vertebrate#Anatomy and morphology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

These redirects should be synced, but I'm not sure which target is preferred. Steel1943 (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943: I'd prefer to retarget it to this section because it describes the anatomical features that vertebrates have in common. This section is structured differently, as an overview of the comparative anatomy of vertebrates. Jarble (talk) 16:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both to Vertebrate#Anatomy and physiology per the above. But this seems like maybe a full article could be written, so tag both with {{R from possibilities}} while we're at it. Duckmather (talk) 04:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 💬 19:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Trolltoohh Pass → Creature of Havoc#Story  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Misspelling of a redirect, Trolltooth Pass, that was moved from the target. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette ^{(Merry Christmas, and a happy new year)} 08:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete since "Trolltoohh" is an implausible misspelling (seriously, the only google search hits are from this very discussion). Duckmather (talk) 03:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Ase Ka Ghadle → Star Pravah  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

not mentioned at target -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Just a one line mention at List of programmes broadcast by Star Pravah. Jay 💬 19:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 30-simplex → Simplex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

not mentioned at target article -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I guess? One can certainly conceive of an N-simplex (aka a (N + 1)-cell) for any dimension N that is a nonnegative integer, but it seems like none of these are particularly interesting in and of themselves once N gets big enough (for example we don't have articles about a 100-simplex or a googolplex-simplex, or really any simplex in dimension 11 or up). Oddly enough, 11-simplex through 29-simplex are all also redirects to Simplex (see Special:WhatLinksHere/Simplex to verify!), but I think they should also get deleted as well while we're at it since there's nothing interesting we can say about these topics individually, I think. Duckmather (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. ^Complex/_Rational 00:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Josef Fritzi → Fritzl case  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Implausible typo. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 04:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Obviously created in error in 2008. Lard Almighty (talk) 07:17, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above Johnson524 05:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment In case it's not clear (it wasn't to me on first read), this is a redirect from FRITZI to FRITZL. Google search returns around 2,130 results for "Josef Fritzi", vs 440,000 for "Josef Fritzl". Almost all of the 2,000 results are typos of Fritzl, but the fact there are only 2,000 results makes it a somewhat rare typo, not a common one that Wikipedia should strive to correct 147.147.154.124 (talk) 13:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 retarget to Mayoral elections in Chula Vista, California#2018. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 2018 Chula Vista mayoral election → Chula Vista, California#Government  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

no mention of 2018 election in article Isla🏳️‍⚧ 01:37, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Mayoral elections in Chula Vista, California#2018. Jay 💬 10:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 retarget to Mayoral elections in Chula Vista, California#2014. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• 2014 Chula Vista mayoral election → Chula Vista, California#Government  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

No mention of 2014 election in article Isla🏳️‍⚧ 01:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Mayoral elections in Chula Vista, California#2014. Jay 💬 10:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:09, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Season of Swattings → 2023 swatting of American politicians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Season of Swatting → 2023 swatting of American politicians  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There is one source that used this phrase in a context related to the subject: this article from Florida Politics–which has dubious editorial standards and only uses the phrase once in the passage "But this has been the season of swatting, for some reason". See same rationale at Season of Swatting (singular). Pbritti (talk) 00:46, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Agree with Pbritti, second source which mentions this is a Bloomberg OPINION article, and newspapers like to use click-bait or cutesy terms to get readers to remember and/or propagate their stories. ---Avatar317^(talk) 01:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This title likely came from an opinion article, which regularly has lower editorial standards than standard news articles. Also, such name must appear at a substantially high frequency. HarukaAmaranth ^春_香 02:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Used by Bloomberg and other major news organizations. ShirtNShoesPls (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should be added that ShirtNShoesPls has been asked no fewer than three times to produce a source other than Bloomberg (likely a case of CITOGENESIS) or the Florida blog. They haven't and have refused to explain why. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless ShirtNShoesPls can provide sources for the other major news organizations. Jay 💬 10:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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