Wikipedia talk:Redirect#Link here

{{See also|Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/redirects|Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect|Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/Redirect}}

{{Talk header|WT:R|WT:REDIR|noarchives=yes}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{Wikipedia Help Project |class=Project |importance=High}}

{{WikiProject Redirect}}

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

|archiveheader = {{aan}}

|minthreadsleft = 5

|algo = old(182d)

|archive = Wikipedia talk:Redirect/Archive %(year)d

}}

{{Archive box |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=6 |units=months |index=/Archive index |search=yes|

{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn

|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes

}}

Talk page scope

What is the difference between here and WT:WikiProject Redirects? These two talk pages seem like they ought to be centralized. Sdkbtalk 06:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Deletion nomination of soft redirects

{{noredirect|WP:Redirect assimilation}}

FYI, {{lw|Redirect assimilation}} was created to redirect to Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken

-- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2024

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Redirect|answered=yes}}

Add WP:ASSIMILATION to the shortcut list of § Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken. No source needed since it's pretty obvious. 67.209.130.52 (talk) 19:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{complete2}}. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 20:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I have undone this change. It is by no means obvious to me what this has to do with "assimilation", and there are no nontrivial incoming links. I think this redirect should probably be deleted. --Trovatore (talk) 23:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

{{br}} Listed for RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation. --Trovatore (talk) 03:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

RfC on contested BLARs

There is an RfC on the proper venue for BLARed articles at {{slink|Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)|RfC: Amending ATD-R}}. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:23, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Warning when creating a double redirect

Tech News notes that :phab:T326056 has been resolved and will be implemented this week (presumably Thursday). This means that from then you should get an error message when trying to create a double redirect, recommending you change the target to that of the second redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

:{{to|Thryduulf}} Thank You, that's very handy and helpful! Guess it was a bit tricky when it comes to page moves that create a handful of double redirects automatically. I was hoping to see this in preview, but you actually have to click "Publish changes" to see the error message. It's similar to the user-set "forgot to type in an edit summary" screen, that is, it stops you in your tracks and shows you your error, but if you click "Publish changes" again, the double redirect will be created anyway. Very helpful, thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

::All I'm responsible for is spotting the entry in Tech News and thinking people here would find it useful to know about. The developers are the ones who should be thanked. Thryduulf (talk) 11:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

:::I've grown to expect such a great response from you. You were the conduit by which I learned of this awesome, needed change. That is what I thanked you for; don' sell yursef short, Thryduulf, conduits are important, too! And yes, I have also thanked those pitiful (read that "awesome") devs, as noted in the Phabulous link you left above. 'Tsall good! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Alternate spellings of given names

I have been involved in at least two WP:RMs, where it was proposed that since a specific person is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of a specific alternate spelling of a given name, that person should occupy the "real estate" of alternate spelling and not be redirected to the most common name spelling of the given name. I argued that all alternate spellings should redirect to the article about the given name (as per WP:POFR, which has no exceptions), perhaps WP:IAR in the case if that person using the alternate spelling is the primary topic of all alternate spellings of that given name (which maybe very, very rare). At any rate, for "Jhoanna", an alternate of spelling of "Joanna", this is now been moved to an article about a specific person (see Talk:Jhoanna#Requested move 16 January 2025. Another, "Mikha", an alternate spelling of "Micah", is currently being discussed at Talk:Bini (group)#Requested move 29 January 2025. Both Jhoanna and Mikha being discussed are members of Bini (group).

What's the actual policy or interpretation on this? Howard the Duck (talk) 20:50, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:If one individual is the most notable (or only) holder of a particular name, they are a likely candidate for being the primary topic. This is especially true for unusual spellings. Jhoanna is not even so much as mentioned at Joanna so there's currently no reason at all to redirect to there. While Mikha is mentioned as a Hebrew spelling of the name at Micah, the page does not list any individuals with that name. Whether Mikha (singer) is the primary topic over Mikha Tambayong or any other individuals with the name can be discussed. WP:POFR does not in any way prohibit such primary topic redirects (or moving a mononymous performer to the base name). A case could also be made to redirect Mikha to Michael (given name) as a hypocorism. olderwiser 21:10, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

::{{tpq|If one individual is the most notable (or only) holder of a particular name, they are a likely candidate for being the primary topic.}} I agree with this, and extend that to if a person is the most notable (or only) person who spells their name a given way, then they are likely to be the primary topic for that spelling. Hatnotes can and should be used to direct people to articles about people with similar names in the same way that Carole White and Carol White do. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:: The names Micah ({{langx|he|מִיכָה|translit=Mikhah}}) and Michael ({{langx|he|מִיכָאֵל|translit=Mikha'El}}) are related but distinct. Someone searching for for Mikha is almost certainly searching for Micah, not Michael. Absent a person spelling his name that way or a DAB page, it should redirect to Micah with a {{tl|distinguish}} hatnote. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:::There are a number of persons named Mikhail for whom 'Mikha' is used as a hypocorism. I only mentioned Michael (given name) because Mikahil redirects there. olderwiser 17:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:William Shakspere was well known for spelling his own name in about a dozen different ways. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:52, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:The guidance that applies is WP:SMALLDETAILS - {{tq|The general approach is that whatever readers might type in the search box, they are guided as swiftly as possible to the topic they might reasonably be expected to be looking for}}. So the real question is if the average reader would be more likely to recognize and use such a term as a reference to a specific topic, or as a variant of a common name. --Joy (talk) 13:16, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

:So apparently my interpretation of {{quote|Alternative spellings or punctuation. For example, Colour redirects to Color, and Al-Jazeera redirects to Al Jazeera.}}

:where "Jhoanna" should redirect to "Joanna" is not what most people in this discussion agree to, except for Jewish names I suppose. If the interpretation of most people here is the correct one, I propose that the specific bullet point should be amended. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Adding a trick

Should I add the trick where you can append ?redirect=no to the end of the URL and ignore the redirect? Justjourney (talk) 03:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The Help:Redirect page bares many similarities to this one. I am aware that the help namespace is supposed to be a tutorial, but for a tutorial, the help page and this one aren't exactly all that different. That begs the question, if the 2 pages are similar, why separate them? Case in point, the Help:Merging page is simply a disambiguation to the Wikipedia one. Senomo Drines (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

:Help:Redirect and Wikipedia:How to make a redirect have a lot of overlap and could be merged without a lot of impact as far as can tell. But I strongly disagree with merging the how-to material with Wikipedia:Redirect. This page has WAY too much obscure details that would be overwhelming for someone looking for simple how-to instructions. olderwiser 18:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

::Just been waiting a few years for someone to do it Wikipedia talk:How to make a redirect#Merge into Help:Redirect? Moxy🍁 00:31, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

:Oppose merging Help:Redirect into this page. They cover distinct material: this page is mainly a guideline regarding redirects, the help page tells more about the technical way they work and how to use/make them. Mr. Starfleet Command (talk) 00:14, 16 April 2025 (UTC)