Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 1#<1>

• {{no redirect|1 = Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona }} → :Arizona  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desert_Village_Mobile_Home_Park,_Arizona&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Desert_Village_Mobile_Home_Park%2C_Arizona stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

The park isn't notable, as decided in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desert Village Mobile Home Park, Arizona. A redirect to Arizona doesn't make any sense either. This might even fall under {{tl|db-r3}}. – Frood (talk) 23:27, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Delete no idea why this redirect was created. SportingFlyer T·C 23:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• Weak retarget (2nd choice) to List of places in Arizona (D), which is the only article that mentions this park, or delete (1st choice) due to the comma-separated disambiguator and create Desert Village Mobile Home Park instead. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• What do you mean by "not notable"? CuteDolphin712 (talk) 03:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• :A mobile home park? As was discussed in the AfD I mentioned, it doesn't meet the criteria for notability. Frankly I'm not sure why it would be. – Frood (talk) 00:11, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
• How to make other article like that notable? CuteDolphin712 (talk) 11:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
• Delete. None of our core readers will ever search for this until the year 2054. This place is the proverbial ""not a census designated or incorporated place having an official federally recognized name." Bearian (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Ariel, Israel }} → :Ariel (city)  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ariel,_Israel&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Ariel%2C_Israel stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Ariel, Israel|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ariel, Israel closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Ariel, Israel|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ariel, Israel closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Ariel, Israel|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ariel, Israel closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

The redirect might cause confusion: Hebron Ariel is not in Israel (it is on the occupied West Bank). Presently there is 0 links to Ariel, Israel‎ (and I cannot see any reason why anyone should need to link to it.) Huldra (talk) 22:15, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

:"Ariel, Israel" is a common search term (with over 100,000 searches on Google). Someone who created [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shit_Happens_in_Gaza&action=history this redirect] should not be making these kind of suggestions. Here come the Suns (talk) 22:36, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

::Presently there are 0 article links to Ariel, Israel‎ (and I cannot see any reason why anyone should need to link to it.) Having this redir only obfuscates the facts, Huldra (talk) 23:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

::: and how many articles link to Shit Happens in Gaza? You are the classic WP:NOTHERE editor. Here come the Suns (talk) 23:42, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep per extant usage (e.g., "[https://www.chabad.org/news/article_cdo/aid/4155917/jewish/Two-Killed-One-Wounded-at-Industrial-Park-Near-Ariel-Israel.htm Two Killed, One Wounded at Industrial Park Near Ariel, Israel]"), and tag as either {{tl|R from incorrect name}} or {{tl|R from incorrect disambiguation}}. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

::Comment: I doubt if the organ of the Chabad movement can be considered a source on anything except themselves. Huldra (talk) 21:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep as plausible search. Not to mention that for all practical purposes it is indeed in Israel. Debresser (talk) 23:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• Keep as plausible search. I appreciate that it is highly politically loaded but the term is used. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:21, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
• Keep – common search term as stated above, especially in accordance with Wikipedia's general naming conventions of City, Country and not City (city) for non-controversial cases. Also: It doesn't satisfy any of the criteria in WP:R#DELETE —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 20:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Hebron, Israel }} → :Hebron  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hebron,_Israel&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Hebron%2C_Israel stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Hebron, Israel|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Hebron, Israel closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Hebron, Israel|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Hebron, Israel closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Hebron, Israel|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Hebron, Israel closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

The redirect might cause confusion: Hebron is not in Israel (it is on the occupied West Bank). Presently there is 0 links to Hebron, Israel‎ (and I cannot see any reason why anyone should need to link to it.) Huldra (talk) 22:15, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep per extant usage (e.g., "[https://vosizneias.com/2019/06/29/hebron-israel-palestinian-forces-arrest-participant-in-us-mideast-workshop/ Hebron, Israel – Palestinian Forces Arrest Participant In US Mideast Workshop]"), and tag as either {{tl|R from incorrect name}} or {{tl|R from incorrect disambiguation}}. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

::Again, I doubt if Vos Iz Neias? ("run by four anonymous Orthodox Jews") is a RS on anything, except themselves, Huldra (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep per my comments at #Barkan, Israel. Thryduulf (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• Keep as plausible search. Debresser (talk) 23:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder }} → :The Chargesheet: Innocent or Guilty?  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chargesheet:_The_Shutterlock_Murder&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Chargesheet%3A_The_Shutterlock_Murder stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Chargesheet: The Shutterlock Murder closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

Not a plausible search term, the correct title is Chargesheet: The Shuttlecock Murder. I would suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:53, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Salt-tolerant grass }} → :Ammophila (plant)  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salt-tolerant_grass&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-10&end=2019-11-08&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Salt-tolerant_grass stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Salt-tolerant grass|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Salt-tolerant grass closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Salt-tolerant grass|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Salt-tolerant grass closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Salt-tolerant grass|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Salt-tolerant grass closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

Not mentioned at target. Salt tolerant grass is a description, not a specific taxon. Hyphenated "salt-tolerant" is an unlikely search term unless there is some entity that is pushing "Salt-tolerant Grass" as an Official-common Name of Ammophila (Wikipedia prefers to ignore idiosyncratic capitals, but perhaps not hyphens). However, I can find no evidence of this as a term particularly associated with Ammophila. Plantdrew (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete as ambiguous search term that is not known to be an alternative name. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:46, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
• Delete as an unlikely search term, and the target is not the only salt-tolerant grass. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:28, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
• {{u|Plantdrew}}, wouldn't Halophyte be a suitable target? Admittedly, it's about plants, not restricted to grasses. – Uanfala (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

::That could be appropriate with an {{tl|R from subtopic}}. But if anybody is searching for the topic of grasses that can tolerate salt (or is wanting to start an article on that topic), I'd guess they might be more likely to look for "salt tolerant grass" than "salt-tolerant grass". Or they might look for "salt-tolerant grasses", or a WP:PANDORA's box of any number of other variant terms. Plantdrew (talk) 04:31, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete per {{u|Plantdrew}} (nice nickname!) and the nom. While it's true "salt-tolerant grass" isn't listed in the target article, "tolerant of saline [...]" is. So, it's a plausible search term. The problem, as I see it, is there are, presumably, more than one salt-tolerant grass. Disambiguation is a possibility in the future, I think, but we'd need to put together a dab page with at least an initial list of salt-tolerant grasses; however, if {{u|Plantdrew}} wants to add an initial list of dab targets at the subject page, I'd, alternatively, support a move to...

:Disambiguate (2nd choice) or...

:Retarget (3rd choice) per {{u|BDD}} with one or two hatnotes, with potential to disambiguate in the future. --Doug Mehus T·C 21:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

• Retarget to Halophyte. Pretty good R from subtopic IMO, since a couple of grasses are mentioned there, and readers will get general information about salt-tolerant plants. And in American English, at least, the hyphen is correct usage, even though its absence really doesn't affect understanding. --BDD (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

:{{u|BDD}} I'd support that as an interim solution, with one or two hatnotes to other salt-tolerant grasses, without prejudice to converting to a dab page in future maybe? Doug Mehus T·C 21:42, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

::Other salt-tolerant grasses could be added to the Examples section, but I don't think a hatnote is the right approach. Crucially, it doesn't appear that any grass species is called simply "Salt-tolerant grass" as a common name; it's just a descriptive term. --BDD (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

• Retarget per BDD. That article is the best we have to offer, and significantly better than the search results. Thryduulf (talk) 21:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Jack Gardine }} → :Jack Garfein  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Gardine&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-23&end=2019-11-21&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Jack_Gardine stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Jack Gardine|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Jack Gardine closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Jack Gardine|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Jack Gardine closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Jack Gardine|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Jack Gardine closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

The redirect does not appear to be an alternative name or spelling for the target, and I think that the edit distance is a little too far for the misspelling to be a useful redirect. I would thus suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep The name was annunciated incorrectly in an interview I heard where it sounded like this. It took further research to find the Wikipedia page of the real man. The purpose of these redirects is to make it easier for people to find a page when they hear it in media. I've never understood why there is such a drive to delete simple redirects that make Wikipedia a more accessible research tool.--Dr who1975 (talk) 20:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

::The reasoning behind nominating these sorts of redirects for deletion is that they can often make it difficult to find other articles (either already existing now, or created down the road) that are closer matches to the misspelling/mispronunciation than the target of this corrective redirect. In this case, I'm not really sure how to weigh a mispronunciation in an interview vs. the potential for confusion, and would appreciate it if other editors also weighed in. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm not seeing how this is a notable misspelling or mispronunciation. Steel1943 (talk) 00:52, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm not finding any evidence that this one mispronunciation in a single interview has gained any traction as a notable name for the subject. Thryduulf (talk) 10:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Xyfindit }} → :TrackR  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xyfindit&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-23&end=2019-11-21&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Xyfindit stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Xyfindit|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Xyfindit closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Xyfindit|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Xyfindit closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Xyfindit|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Xyfindit closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

It would appear that Xyfindit is a competitor to TrackR [https://xyfindit.com/compare/xy-vs-tile-vs-trackr/], which makes this redirect less than useful. I would suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:22, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete per nominator. Thryduulf (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Issue of money }} → :Money creation  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Issue_of_money&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-23&end=2019-11-21&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Issue_of_money stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Issue of money|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Issue of money closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Issue of money|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Issue of money closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Issue of money|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Issue of money closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

This phrase has an ambiguous meaning and thus is an unsuitable search term. While it could refer to "issuing money" (in which case the current target is appropriate), it could also refer to (and IMO more strongly refers to) something along the lines of "the problem of money", in which case the current target is not particularly helpful. Due to the lack of usage history, I think that deletion is a better option than disambiguation. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Keep. While it is potentially ambiguous, only one of the two possible uses is a plausible search term for an encyclopaedia. We have exactly four other titles beginning "Issue of": Issue of Edward III of England is an article using a completely different sense of "issue" and so is not relevant here. Issue of law and Issue of fact both redirect to Question of law, which is about a specific distinction that is the subject of an article and not comparable to the general "problem of" sense. Issue of Taiwan, a redirect to Political status of Taiwan, is the closest but again there is a very specific target article about a single clear issue. There is no equivalent for money as there are multiple potential problems of and/or with money in multiple senses that are way too vague to disambiguate - even if there is an article. On the other hand "Money creation" is a specific, concrete subject for an encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

::The above keep argument is reasonable, as nom I'm fine with closing this as keep as opposed to relisting or ending as no consensus. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:23, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = CaPone }} → :Al Capone  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CaPone&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-23&end=2019-11-21&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=CaPone stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:CaPone|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#CaPone closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:CaPone|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#CaPone closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:CaPone|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#CaPone closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

There was only one use of this, where Capone (rapper) was intended, which {{diff||927472932|913898937|I fixed}}. {{-r|Capone}} targets Al Capone, but this is an unusual misspelling of the name, so if someone goes out of their way to spell it like this, Al Capone is more likely not their intended target.

It could be retargeted to Capone (surname) or Capone (disambiguation) (which should probably be merged anyway). 185.62.130.234 (talk) 19:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete not a stylization used by the rapper as with P!nk AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Bigger Now }} → :Head Above Water (album)  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bigger_Now&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-10-23&end=2019-11-21&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Bigger_Now stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Bigger Now|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Bigger Now closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Bigger Now|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Bigger Now closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Bigger Now|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Bigger Now closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

Appears to be a typo for a song on the album Bigger Wow. Didn't find any other logical target for the redirect Richhoncho (talk) 21:09, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

• Delete Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Upper Caste (disambiguation) }} → :Forward caste  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Upper_Caste_(disambiguation)&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Upper_Caste_%28disambiguation%29 stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Upper Caste (disambiguation)|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Upper Caste (disambiguation) closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Upper Caste (disambiguation)|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Upper Caste (disambiguation) closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Upper Caste (disambiguation)|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Upper Caste (disambiguation) closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

The redirect does not point at a disambiguation page and is thus unnecessary, and thus I would suggest deletion. Upper Caste already exists and points at the same target. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:22, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is not a valid {{tl|R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, and its existence actually hinders use of the more appropriate redirect (Upper Caste). -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:16, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• Upper Caste was a disambiguation page (though not a good one) until it was redirected in March. Since this doesn't qualify as a WP:INTDAB link, it can be speedied under WP:G14. - Eureka Lott 03:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

:*Retarget to Upper Caste now that it's a disambiguation page again. - Eureka Lott 15:40, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep and restore Upper Caste as a dab page. In March its content was merged into the article Forward caste, but it appears that the editor who performed the merge wasn't aware of the discussion at Talk:Upper Caste#Proposed merge with Forward caste, or if they had been aware it's difficult to see how they would have found consensus for the merge. The merge target is Forward caste#Upper caste, but that section is out of place there: the article is about a concept with specific legal and political meaning, and there's no reason for it go into detail documenting the general meanings of a tenuously related ambiguous term. – Uanfala (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
• Delete G14 notwithstanding possible re-creation if Upper Caste is restored as a dab page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Ingurisshu }} → :Engrish  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ingurisshu&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Ingurisshu stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Ingurisshu|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ingurisshu closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Ingurisshu|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ingurisshu closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Ingurisshu|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Ingurisshu closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

While this is an approximation of a broken Japanese pronunciation of the target, the actual Japanese convention is to just write "Engrish" (see [https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engrish jaWiki entry]). I would suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:17, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Delete. The very reason ill-formed use of English by speakers of East Asian languages is known as Engrish is because those languages lack the distinction between L and R. So Ingurisshu is just the Japanese rendition of English and means "English" (be it language, people, or whatever), not "Engrish" (because there's no way to distinguish it from "English" in those languages). Although we could refine it to English language or English (disambiguation), that would be a very obscure synonym discouraged at WP:R#D8/WP:FORRED as it is a romanization of the Japanese rendition of the name of the language or people in English, even though the language is referred to by the exonym 英語 and the people as イングランド人, seldom as イングリッシュ (Ingurisshu)—not to mention Japanese orthography doesn't use the Latin alphabet. Nardog (talk) 19:39, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per WP:G4. I created the redirect by mistake. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 11:28, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = List of United States tornadoes in 2019 }} → :List of United States tornadoes from January to March 2019  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_United_States_tornadoes_in_2019&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=List_of_United_States_tornadoes_in_2019 stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:List of United States tornadoes in 2019|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#List of United States tornadoes in 2019 closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:List of United States tornadoes in 2019|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#List of United States tornadoes in 2019 closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:List of United States tornadoes in 2019|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#List of United States tornadoes in 2019 closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

This redirect should be deleted. It was created when the target page was moved back in February, but that move was soon reverted. The redirect is no longer accurate as there are now multiple monthly lists for United States tornadoes (see Tornadoes of 2019#Events). It is standard procedure from WP:SEVERE to have monthly U.S. tornado lists, but not an annual list. TornadoLGS (talk) 18:50, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Retarget to Tornadoes of 2019#Events, which has links to all the lists, or disambig at this title. This is a plausible search term and the former name location of article content, so we should do our best to take readers to the content they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• I only see one list like that, Lists of United States tornadoes in 2009, so if this is kept as a list of lists, it should be moved to Lists of United States tornadoes in 2019. - Eureka Lott 03:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
• I might favor retargeting to Tornadoes of 2019#Events, since a similar thing was with List of United States tornadoes in 2010. Though, it may be worth noting that, in addition to monthly lists, tornado lists for very large outbreaks get their own pages. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:02, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
• Is this discussion closed, or is further discussion needed? TornadoLGS (talk) 21:54, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
• {{replyto|TornadoLGS}} It's not closed yet. Whether it will be closed or relisted for further discussion is something an uninvolved editor needs to determine. Thryduulf (talk) 10:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
• Retarget or create set index article at Lists of United States tornadoes in 2019. The benefits from deletion are minimal, and the harms real. --BDD (talk) 16:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine }} → :Yoga as therapy  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yoga_as_exercise_or_alternative_medicine&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Yoga_as_exercise_or_alternative_medicine stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

Unlikely search phrase with "or" in the middle; we already have "Yoga as exercise", "Yoga as therapy", and "Yoga as alternative medicine" so this one is redundant. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep The page explains quite clearly that "This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external" and the page has plenty of incoming links within the project. It also has an [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=all-time&pages=Yoga_as_exercise_or_alternative_medicine above-average level of traffic] which seems to refute the claim that it's an unlikely form of words. Andrew D. (talk) 12:41, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

:: Neither of these are good reasons really. The statement makes little sense as no history is accessible on the redirect page, see for yourself. On incoming links (to a redirect!), they should all go somewhere better: thanks for noticing this – I've repointed them directly to where they should go now. On the traffic, it's steadily declining since Yoga as exercise and Yoga as therapy were created. That fact points to a further problem with the redirect: with the disjunction ("or") between two link targets, it's very likely to go the wrong place: indeed, yoga as exercise is a more likely target than the current one, therapy, but then anyone wanting the therapy article would hardly key in "as exercise", and anyone wanting the "as exercise" would hardly key in "alternative medicine", would they now. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:56, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

::: On further investigation, I find that this matter has a complex history. First two pages were merged: Yoga (alternative medicine) with Yoga as exercise to form Yoga as exercise or alternative medicine. Now this has been split again. These mergers and splits seem to be performed with little participation and the lack of stability indicates a lack of consensus. Yoga has a long and rich history and there are many variations. This means that there are many ways to approach the topic and so we see variation here too. As the participants come and go, we should maintain our history of the matter, rather than deleting it. This provides an audit trail, attribution and explanation for those who wish to trace the history of our coverage. My !vote stands. Andrew D. (talk) 21:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

:::Policy is that incoming external links are also considered, so they are perfectly good reasons. If there is a netter target, then it should be fixed by changing to that and a hatnote added to the new target, not deleted. Andrewa (talk) 22:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Keep. No reason to delete, and preserving existing links as per policy and long-standung practice is a valid reason to keep. Andrewa (talk) 22:10, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• Keep redirects like this are cheap N harmless. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 11:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Thuringwethil }} → :List of Middle-earth characters#T  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thuringwethil&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Thuringwethil stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Thuringwethil|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Thuringwethil closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Thuringwethil|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Thuringwethil closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Thuringwethil|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Thuringwethil closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

This redirect is not mentioned in the target article. It was recreated almost immediately after a deletion discussion was concluded. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 07:59, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Yes, I created it after the deletion discussion in which I explained why a redirect was the right outcome.—S Marshall T/C 15:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I agree with the AfD comments by User:Zxcvbnm and User:Sgeureka. A character redirect to a list that does not mention that character is not helpful for readers, and they should be the primary consideration. As for discouraging editors from re-creating the article, a red deletion notice seems much more likely to discourage that than a confusing redirect. If there is consensus that the character merits a mention at the list, then we should restore, merge, and redirect, but that option was specifically considered and rejected at the AfD. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 00:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

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

• {{no redirect|1 = Fayetteville Highlanders }} → :Carolina League  (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fayetteville_Highlanders&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2019-11-01&end=2019-11-30&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Fayetteville_Highlanders stats])     [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Fayetteville Highlanders|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Fayetteville Highlanders closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Fayetteville Highlanders|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Fayetteville Highlanders closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Fayetteville Highlanders|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Fayetteville Highlanders closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ] 

{{Priorrfd|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 November 13#Fayetteville Highlanders|delete}}

Delete since even though the target is different, the redirect seems to have the same WP:REDLINK concerns as it did in the previous discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 02:51, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

• Delete for now. Teams of this name [https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/team.cgi?city=Fayetteville&state=NC&country=US played in two different leagues] (the Eastern Carolina League in the 1910s and 20s and the Carolina League in the 1950s), so redirecting to one of them isn't appropriate. - Eureka Lott 15:23, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

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