Login
Login

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 1#Ntsysv

{{rfd log header|2021|October 31|2021|November 2}}

=[[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 1|November 1]]=

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 1, 2021.

==Draft:Imran Ali==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 13%23Draft:Imran Ali

==Pipelinks==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 13%23Pipelinks

==Ntsysv==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 13%23Ntsysv

==Saints==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 9%23Saints

==IPhone 14==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was delete

. ✗plicit 03:36, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL and WP:TOOSOON, also per precedent such as Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_June_26#IPhone_12_and_13. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:53, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete and SALT against recreation.—Locke Cole • t • c 15:56, 2 November 2021 (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.

==White iPhone==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was delete

. ✗plicit 03:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

The target does not mention white iPhones, although the availability of white iPhones is discussed several times on the iPhone article, nonetheless suggest deletion as this isn't used much. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:49, 1 November 2021 (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.

==Earl of Bute==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 13%23Earl of Bute

==24 pounder==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 16%2324 pounder

==IRestore==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was delete

. ✗plicit 03:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Not mentioned at the target article, and currently pointing to a defunct section (I assume it corresponds to the current #Low-level laser therapy). I assume this is a specific branded therapy. MOS:MED doesn't forbid such a mention, but it seems unnecessary. BDD (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete unless it is mentioned and referenced as a notable brand for laser therapy along with a competitor brand HairMax. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:30, 1 November 2021 (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.

==Blue phone==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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

. I thought for sure this would refer to Emergency telephones, but I guess those are blue light phones. -- Tavix (talk) 16:18, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

No mention of "blue" at the target, no relevant results in an internet search. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 21:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Retarget to BLU Products, a company that sells mobile phones, as a homophone and the only thing I'm finding in search results other than phones which happen to be blue. Possibly add a hatnote to Blu (Italian company), as they were also in the mobile phone business, but I don't know they were ever referred to as "Blu phone" and as they've been defunct for a decade it's not easy to tell. Thryduulf (talk) 22:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete, unless there is ample documented evidence of "blue phone" being used colloquially by doctors. As the creator of the redirect, I'd like to clarify that I was referring to the interpreter phones used in hospitals, which are very often bright blue (particularly models made by CyraCom Language Solutions and LanguageLine Solutions). I have only ever heard one doctor call interpreter phones "blue phones," and unless we find out that a significant amount of doctors call them that, we shouldn't keep a redirect based off what just one person calls them.
    A retarget to BLU Products could potentially work, but I doubt it would be used very often. Marisauna (talk) 01:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment; I'm seeing stuff about CyraCom Language Solutions, a company that apparently provides blue phones that offices can use to contact interpreters. I think that might be what the redirect creator had in mind.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  01:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment: redirect creator here, that is precisely what I had in mind.
    My full explanation is above; if it can be verified that people call CyraCom phones "blue phones" colloquially, then I say the redirect should be kept. Marisauna (talk) 01:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • :If there isn't any mention in the target article then people will just be confused. If you can source it, and it's WP:DUE, then a mention can be added and we can target whatever section the mention is in. In that case I'd add a hatnote to BLU Products (maybe {{temp|redirect-distinguish}}). Thryduulf (talk) 02:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. At the moment this is a generic term with no attested specific meaning. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:23, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:51, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete: I'm not seeing that it is a likely search term for BLU Products, and there doesn't seem to be a primary topic for this term other than blue colored phones themselves. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:00, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete for now as there are no sources forthcoming. Jay (talk) 17:23, 13 November 2021 (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.

==Ezreal==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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) 16:20, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target, search results on-wiki consist exclusively of passing mentions in article about single gamers and similar. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment this could retarget to Azrael as a {{tl|R from misspelling}} -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

:Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

:Retarget to Azrael with {{tl|R from misspelling}}. Curbon7 (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

:Retarget to Theophory_in_the_Bible#El_theophory with {{tl|R from misspelling}} for the name "Ezrael". I think it's a more plausible misspelling to this name than Azrael. --Lenticel (talk) 04:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 20:34, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete as more associated with the unmentioned League of Legends character than a spelling variant of Ezrael, Azrael or Israel. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:41, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per Angus. Jay (talk) 17:23, 13 November 2021 (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.

==Hecarim==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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

. An alternative target was proposed but the emerging consensus is that this proposed target is not ideal and the target article is itself at risk of deletion. Deryck C. 12:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target, but Centaurs in popular culture#Games, while unsourced, appears to be a good enough alternative? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 20:32, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete per user:61. The proposed target, as the nom suggested has only an unsourced mention. Jay (talk) 17:28, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak delete Especially without sourcing, I'm skeptical that mention could survive a good cleanup of the popular culture article. --BDD (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. Centaurs in popular culture exists on a knife-edge right now. It survived Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaurs in popular culture, with participants expressing wishful thinking that the list would be cleaned up; that still hasn't happened. In the meantime, I would not put any eggs in that basket. -- Tavix (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2021 (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.

==Lukács László==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 14%23Lukács László

==Just Another War in Space==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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.

--BDD (talk) 16:40, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Not mentioned at target, and extremely obscure so probably shouldn't be included there (and thus should not exist as a redirect either) Fram (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Retarget to List of Atari ST games where mentioned. The developer Azeroth Publishing doesn't seem to have an article.. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Well, it was only added after the RfD started[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Atari_ST_games&type=revision&diff=1049384215&oldid=1047613242], and oh dear, what a dreadful list that is (that lead sentence is the icing on the unreferenced cake). I don't really see what this redirect adds (will anyone search for the title and not already know that it is an Atari ST game?), but oh well. Fram (talk) 07:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree with Fram that List of Atari ST games is a dreadful list (and I just tagged it as unreferenced). In my opinion, skeleton mentions that do not include any additional information is not substantial enough to support a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 03:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: one more try for a consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 19:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete per Tavix. Jay (talk) 17:32, 13 November 2021 (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.

==The Border Battle==

File:Three disambiguation arrows icon in rounded blue square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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

. Although there was only one genuine vote, it had implicit support during relisting, and the drafted disambiguation page addresses the nomination. Jay (talk) 20:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

This expression is not used at the target, and may be ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment. "May be ambiguous" is unnecessarily cautious. We also have {{-r|Border Battle}} → Major League Baseball rivalries, where "[The] Border Battle" isn't mentioned, and Battle of the Border. But my gsearch shows that the term is used for many interstate (international?) rivalries in many sports. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 02:30, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Yes, you're right, it is certainly ambiguous. I'm adding Border Battle to this nomination today (15 Oct), and ask for it to be relisted to ensure proper debate. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Relisting to ensure the newly-added Border Battle has a full discussion

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 12:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Convert to disambiguation page Border Battle should be a dab page, listing the various sports rivalries called "Border Battle" already so indicated in the two redirects, plus adding see alsos for the various "Battle of the Border"s. It would be good if someone could write a border skirmish military combat article. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: a draft disambiguation page would be helpful here
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 18:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • DRAFTed I've drafted a sample dab page at Border Battle, and I've updated both the MLB and KY-TN articles to include the term with references. There's still the missing border skirmish article that needs writing, and other sports and military border battles to add. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 22:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
  • {{noredirect|Border Battle (Minnesota–Wisconsin)}} should retarget to the dab page afterwards, as there are multiple Minn-Wis sports rivalries called the Border Battle, two of which we have article sections covering. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 22:40, 14 November 2021 (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.

==Westchester Borough, New York==

File:White i in purple rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 Westchester Borough to West Chester, Pennsylvania, and Delete the rest

. All are implausible redirects with regards to New York, and Westchester (West Chester) is an actual borough from another state. Jay (talk) 18:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Implausible redirect; there is no borough named "Westchester", "Nassau" or "Suffolk" in New York state. Per Borough (United States), the only boroughs in New York state are the boroughs of New York City. Epicgenius (talk) 23:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep - I disagree that these are implausible. Given their proximity to NY City, I think it is highly plausible for someone to mistake these counties for boroughs of the city, especially given Westchester and Nassau contain parts of the Metropolitan area of the city. A7V2 (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • :They are implausible because people searching for them will generally look for "Westchester, New York", "Nassau, New York", or "Suffolk, New York". Per WP:RFD#DELETE point #2, the redirects might cause confusion; they are all deliberately incorrect, so they should not be linked at all. Furthermore, they are even longer to write out than the more common terms that I just listed.
  • : To refute the point that "it is highly plausible" for these search terms to be confused, these redirects have had [https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&start=2021-05-25&end=2021-09-24&pages=Westchester_Borough,_New_York|Westchester_Borough|Nassau_Borough,_New_York|Nassau_Borough|Suffolk_Borough,_New_York|Suffolk_Borough 45 hits total] from May 25, when they were created, to September 26, before they were nominated for deletion. Most of these redirects have zero hits on any given day and, except for the date of their creation, none have had more than one hit on a single day. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

:::I agree that these should not be linked to, nor was I claiming they should be. Will all people search in the way you propose? Is that a reason to exclude those who don't search in that way? Perhaps the argument holds for the three which include "New York" but I don't agree for the second three. I'm not seeing how they are confusing, and being incorrect doesn't make something confusing, given that the intended target is unambiguous. If you believe that being "deliberately incorrect" is a reason to delete a redirect perhaps you should nominate the 40,000+ redirects in :Category:Redirects from misspellings alone? A7V2 (talk) 04:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

::::{{tq|perhaps you should nominate the 40,000+ redirects in Category:Redirects from misspellings alone?}} - I never said I wanted to do that, nor did I indicate it was necessary. As per WP:RFD#KEEP point #2, misspellings are actually an acceptable reason to keep a redirect. That was a slippery slope argument that is irrelevant to my point. {{pb}}What I said was {{tq|the redirects might cause confusion; they are all deliberately incorrect}}, i.e. they aren't accidental misspellings or misnomers, but terms that can actually confuse people. Like Tavix says [https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=1047019716 below], the term "Westchester Borough" can be confused with West Chester, Pennsylvania, which is an actual borough with almost the same name (just a space between "West" and "Chester"). "Suffolk Borough" can be confused with boroughs of some place named Suffolk. "Nassau Borough" is the only non-confusing one, but it still is very, very unlikely to be searched or used in any form, given the lack of search results for that term and the corresponding lack of views for that redirect. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

:::::I can only read what you've written, and my reading of it was the primary reason you were advocating deletion (at least in your nomination) was that they were incorrect. RFD Keep number 2 includes "by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term" as something which would reduce accidental linking and duplicate articles as well as possibly being of benefit to the browsing user. I disagree with you and Tavix that these are implausible but consensus doesn't require everyone to agree. All that said, so points you and Tavix have raised are very good ones: I would now suggest retargeting Westchester Borough to West Chester, Pennsylvania and delete Suffolk Borough as ambiguous. But when there are no ambiguity issues I don't see a reason to delete as they could be useful. A7V2 (talk) 06:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep per A7V2, we do not require readers to be familiar with the intricacies of the topic before being able to find what they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. For {{tl|R from incorrect name}}s, we should have some evidence of incorrect use for them to be plausible, and I'm just not seeing it. When searching for "Nassau Borough", I only get 400 hits, and the hits I thumbed through are in a list or grouping (eg: {{tq|...Nassau, Borough of Queens,...}} or [https://bmccathletics.com/news/2017/5/4/baseball-panthers-finish-regular-season-with-loss-to-nassau.aspx a sports article with Nassau vs. Borough of Manhattan]). Westchester Borough gets considerably more hits, but they related to West Chester, Pennsylvania. Suffolk has results related to Suffolk, Virginia#Boroughs and Ipswich, borough of Suffolk, England. -- Tavix (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. These are part of the wave of bluntly incorrect names as redirects created en masse by the same user that are being discussed below regarding train stations. oknazevad (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 21:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete redirects 1-3 and 5-6. They don't appear to be a reasonable spelling mistake or misnomer. Retarget redirect 4 (Westchester Borough) to West Chester, Pennsylvania, which seems to be a natural redirect because West Chester is actually a borough. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete redirects 1-3 and 5-6 and Retarget redirect 4 because the concept of "borough" is so strongly associated with New York City that few, if any, would mistake areas outside the City as "boroughs". feminist (+) 10:56, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: This is a WP:INVOLVED relisting so the 13 October log page can finally be closed. An uninvolved editor can asses consensus at any suitable time
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 18:54, 1 November 2021 (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.

==School(TV series)==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was delete

. ✗plicit 03:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

The virtually unused redirect School(TV series) (without an intervening space) is too similar to the also existing redirect School (TV series) pointing to the same target. This complicates maintenance. The malformed page should therefore be deleted. ‑‑ K (🗪 | ✍) 18:24, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete: This redirect is malformed and an improbable search term. ―Susmuffin Talk 18:49, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Susmuffin. Why should this WP:UNNATURALly formatted redirect exist when we already have the correctly formatted counterpart? Regards, SONIC678 23:19, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. I can't say why it should exist, but I can say why it does exist - the article now at School (2011 TV series) was created at this title in 2011 by Lionratz and moved to School (TV series) by Bearcat 5 days later. And so we clearly need someone else with two animals in their username to close this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 01:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. A decade ago, the rule used to be that if a page got created at a misspelled redirect like this and then moved later on to the correct title (as happened here), then even if the misspelled original title had no value as a search or link term it still had to be maintained anyway for GFDL attribution reasons. Consensus changed, and that's no longer the rule, so there's no need to keep this anymore. Bearcat (talk) 10:26, 2 November 2021 (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.

==Soviet annexation of Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Northern Bukovina==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 14%23Soviet annexation of Eastern Galicia, Volhynia and Northern Bukovina

==Soviet annexation of territories inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 14%23Soviet annexation of territories inhabited by ethnic Ukrainians

==Chula-Siam Monorail==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 14%23Chula-Siam Monorail

==Under the Wave at Kanawaga==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

:The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

:The result of the discussion was delete

. ✗plicit 03:34, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Implausible misspelling, where it seems like the creator instead intended to redirect from {{-r|Under the Wave at Kanagawa}} (which is a plausible alternative name based on literal translation and was created one minute after this redirect; this redirect also originally went to The Great Wave off Kanawaga which does not exist). Note that there is no redirect for Kanawaga or Kanawaga Prefecture (the correctly-spelled {{-r|Kanagawa}} redirects to Kanagawa Prefecture); this is the only redirect that uses Kanawaga. Pokechu22 (talk) 05:23, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

:Yes, gotta be honest, I don't remember making this redirect 13 years ago or why I did, but it certainly seems wrong and like I missed spelled Kanagawa --TorsodogTalk 05:41, 1 November 2021 (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.