Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion#Default outcome

After extensive experimenting, I have realised that it would be possible to allow subscribing to specific RFDs while maintaining its transclusion onto main RFD page. It can be done by modifying the individual headers to the following format

TopicName

:Won't that result in a bunch of H2 headers on the daily log pages? Thryduulf (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

::Yes, it would. But also, when transcluded onto the main RfD page, it will show only the H4 headers. H2 headers will aid in getting subscription notifications, and also be easier to deal with on mobile devices, which collapse the H2 sections, allowing a quick scroll to the desired section. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:32, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

If someone is proposing "revert to article and send to afd" they should really give a reason and satisfy themselves that the article is suitable for AfD for that reason. Otherwise the closer, who is performing a clerical function, is being asked to make an unsupported AfD. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 16:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC).

:What I usually do if people have suggested AfD without making an argument for deletion is close as "restore article without prejudice against AfD" and ping anyone who had favored sending to AfD, so they can make the case themself if they want. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 18:46, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

FYI: We now have Wikipedia:Navigation pages, for those cases in which a certain topic shouldn't have its own article but is discussed in multiple places, and so the proper redirect target is ambiguous. I just learned about these, so this a general PSA. Further discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Navigation_pages, where there seems to be some debate about whether these should be kept. Rusalkii (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

As someone to whom this page has been recently relevant I found it rather out of date. I have now updated it to reflect the fact that most closures are now done by script and made a few other tweaks. I'd appreciate another look from more experienced RfD closers, especially at the Redirects with history section. It recommends an action for closing RfDs with significant history that I don't think I've ever seen anyone take, and if anyone has thoughts on whether that is still current and, if so, more detailed instructions, that'd be great.

I'm also interested in any thoughts on whether there's anything closers check as a matter of course beyond history and incoming links for deleted pages. Rusalkii (talk) 20:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi all — I'd like to nominated the cancellation of the redirect from Sectigo to Xcitium. Sectigo is a distinct company from Xcitium, formerly known as Comodo CA, and has operated independently since 2018 under separate ownership and branding. The current redirect is misleading and conflates two unrelated entities. Here are some sources that corraborate this:

Primary source:

https://www.sectigo.com/resource-library/attention-journalists-and-researchers-dont-confuse-comodo-with-sectigo

secondary sources that have part of the rebrand/change of name story highlighted:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sectigo-buys-entrust-public-certificate-business-2025-02-03

https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2025/02/03/scottsdale-cybersecurity-firm-acquisition.html

https://www.channelfutures.com/article/sectigo-google-chrome-policy-partnership

https://www.thesslstore.com/blog/comodo-ca-changes-its-name-to-sectigo/

https://www.pehub.com/gi-partners-purchase-of-sectigo-values-the-company-at-900m/

https://www.msspalert.com/cybersecurity-news/gi-partners-acquires-sectigo/

https://www.wsj.com/articles/sectigo-buys-entrust-public-certificate-business-2025-02-03

Thanks everyone for you consideration!!

181montreal (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2025 (UTC)

:@181montreal, if you'd like to nominate this redirect (or ask someone to do it) this isn't really the best place for it (this is the talk page, for discussing general issues related to redirects; you may have wanted to follow the instructions at WP:RFDHOWTO). That being said, since you have a COI you probably shouldn't do it yourself, so I've taken a look, and the target page says that "Francisco Partners acquired Comodo Certification Authority (Comodo CA) from Comodo Security Solutions, Inc ... and rebranded Comodo CA to Sectigo.", so at first glance it seems appropriate to me, since there's relevant information on the page. I recommend first opening an edit request on Talk:Xcitium using the Edit Request Wizard, explaining why this sentence is wrong or doesn't belong in the Xcitium article, with sources, and what it should be changed to. If that gets accepted, ask that whoever responded to the request nominate the redirect for deletion as well. Rusalkii (talk) 06:31, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks a bunch, Rusalkii I have done that. 181montreal (talk) 18:29, 12 May 2025 (UTC)