Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 December 14: Difference between revisions

Not mentioned in the target article; either way, most likely, if a reader is researching this term, they are looking for some topic that is more specific. [[User:Steel1943|<span style=”color:#AF601A;”>””’Steel1943””'</span>]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 19:46, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Not mentioned in the target article; either way, most likely, if a reader is researching this term, they are looking for some topic that is more specific. [[User:Steel1943|<span style=”color:#AF601A;”>””’Steel1943””'</span>]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 19:46, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

*I am flabbergasted that there isn’t a dedicated article for the topic of jewel theft on Wikipedia. How is that not a thing? I would suggest turning the redirect into a ”’disambiguation”’ page for specific diamond heists in real life and fiction. [[User:MEN KISSING|MEN KISSING]] ([[User talk:MEN KISSING|talk]]) 02:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

*I am flabbergasted that there isn’t a dedicated article for the topic of jewel theft on Wikipedia. How is that not a thing? I would suggest turning the redirect into a ”’disambiguation”’ page for specific diamond heists in real life and fiction. [[User:MEN KISSING|MEN KISSING]] ([[User talk:MEN KISSING|talk]]) 02:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

*:…Probably going to need some examples here to validate that. But even then, a redirect, like this would most likely target a list page, not a disambiguation page, with a title like [[List of diamond heists]]. [[User:Steel1943|<span style=”color:#AF601A;”>””’Steel1943””'</span>]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 04:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

*:…Probably going to need some examples here to validate that. But even then, a redirect like this would most likely target a list page, not a disambiguation page, with a title like [[List of diamond heists]]. [[User:Steel1943|<span style=”color:#AF601A;”>””’Steel1943””'</span>]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 04:23, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

====Armed criminal action====

====Armed criminal action====

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 14, 2025.

unmentioned. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 23:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per G10, redirect from a personal name to a negative topic. Search results are for a woman who was sentenced to life in prison for killing her husband. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:28, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this redirect does not seem to be mentioned or defined in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 23:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umm … WP:RSURPRISE!!! Not mentioned at the target, not clear this is the intended target when searching this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 22:34, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 23:24, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It being mentioned at Polytypic makes me think it is {{R with possibilities}}, and REDYES could be an option, but maybe someone who knows biology could speak to whether it should just be included in taxon, and the redirect kept? Happy Editing — IAmChaos 00:45, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn’t necessarily have to refer to the Chinese type of housing. Can also mean Transitional housing, Boarding house, Dormitory, etc. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:19, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse redirect. Wikipedia articles preserve title casing, so the actual title should be moved to Interim housing. guninvalid (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would intensify the problem given that the article is not a broad concept page on Interim housing. At best it should be “Interim housing in China” if the proper name was removed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:35, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: The current target is at AFD, and so far has 100% support to merge. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 23:20, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article about a specific film shouldn’t have been redirected to the disambiguation page. Go to AfD, or retarget to Erik Palladino? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:57, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Send to AFD. A retarget wouldn’t work either since it’s not mentioned there; the targeting to the dab page was definitely not right, and I guess we can call it a contested PROD and send it to AFD as a procedural thing; or maybe let the PRODder, Donaldd23 do so himself if he wants to write a more fleshed out rationale for it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:47, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree here too – there was an article, mostly plot, which was BLAR’d without explanation by an IP, but given the lack of sourcing I think that may have been justified. That said, this is more than just a redirect and may deserve an AfD. ASUKITE 16:12, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or restore, I don’t understand why it was redirected to the DAB by User:~2025-38537-34 when it appear to be the only 2008 film, was there another they were thinking it is ambiguous with? Otherwise it makes no sense to redirect to the DAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Now mentioned at Erik Palladino, where it can be retarget’d to, as suggested as alternative solution by the nominator.@Deacon Vorbis ~2025-38537-34 (talk) 19:31, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Asukite pinging you for same reason. ~2025-38537-34 (talk) 19:35, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @~2025-38537-34, I think in this case AfD should be a first stop, with the possibility of retargeting being an option there, if only to give the original article a chance. AfD tends to focus on notability first, so if the sourcing is inadequate but there are sources somewhere it can still be saved. ASUKITE 01:15, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• For the record, I’d still oppose a retarget to the Paladino article (and confirm still support sending to AFD). While it’s mentioned there, there’s no significant detail, other than to say that this guy was in it. If this film is truly not notable (which I haven’t looked into), we probably shouldn’t be mentioning it there. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:14, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Since it shouldn’t have been redirected to the disambiguation page, the correct response is to undo that redirection. — Tavix ^(talk) 04:45, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target; NPOV. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 23:50, 6 December 2025 (UTC) fixed nom statement 21:20, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. No deletion rationale provided, and WP:CHEAP. guninvalid (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: There isn’t anything to predominantly tie this specific phrase/slogan to the specific protest(s) covered in the article June 2025 Los Angeles protests against mass deportation. There are multiple articles that cover opposition to ICE & mass deportation in the US, and none of them stand out from the rest as having unique warrant to be the target for this redirect. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 00:16, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I’m fine with disambiguating or pointing to a DAB page instead. guninvalid (talk) 06:38, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. “Happy Editing” isn’t a reason. qq77 💬 00:17, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• @IAmChaos: Any chance you could provide your rationale here? The issue is apparently not inherently obvious. Steel1943 (talk) 06:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi, sorry, looks like my nom got lost in posting. Probably my fault. I’m fixing now. @Guninvalid @77qq each mentioned lack of nom. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 21:19, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Jamie. Yeah, the nom is certainly lacking, but I agree with the followup assessment. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 18:01, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, is this even used in RS? User:Easternsahara_{review this} 20:00, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a pretty common slogan, including being used by celebrities, [1][2][3][4][5] so yes it is used in RS. It probably warrants some mention at Abolish ICE or United_States_Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement#Criticism. — Patar knight – ^chat/_{contributions} 21:36, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

← Metallurgist (talk) 01:01, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target or anywhere on enwiki, unclear how this name relates to the target Mdewman6 (talk) 21:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was the intended name when laid down, but changed by the Admiralty during construction. I’ve added that to the target article.- Davidships (talk) 00:54, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Totally vague WP:RSURPRISE. No good target for this. Steel1943 (talk) 19:57, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Though this is clearly a misspelling, I think this should be deleted since it can be considered ambiguous. Due to the missing “b”, someone could be searching this term fully intending to locate Robe. Steel1943 (talk) 19:52, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can’t see the nom’s point about robe. I say Keep as plausible misspelling. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 23:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“Robe” – “r” – “y” with the suffix “ry” being a common suffix to use to describe something as a noun (such as embroidery vs. “embroider”. Steel1943 (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the redirect unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:50, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article; either way, most likely, if a reader is researching this term, they are looking for some topic that is more specific. Steel1943 (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Performing a criminal action while armed is not exclusive to Robbery; such a situation could also be the precursor for a murder. Steel1943 (talk) 19:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I sort of care! This was way premature!

Really long decimal expansion redirects like this, such as the longest possible redirect of 255 characters, do have a novel use for aiding search functionality, as was brought up here. Now, this was 127 characters long, but I checked myself and it actually seemed to have the same effect.

Does 0.999… in particular need to have a super long redirect? I might say delete weakly, since it is just clearly nines spammed a lot. But I feel chipping in on redirects of a similar nature for other decimal expansions is worthwhile. MEN KISSING (talk) 21:02, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m in agreement with the “ridiculous, bordering on disruptive” comment above. Getting rid of it straight away was a sensible choice. MartinPoulter (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MEN KISSING – see the note above. Further comments should be made at WP:DRV. Happy Editing — IAmChaos 23:16, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this was 129 characters long, actually consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 02:04, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this page. I marked it for speedy delete, for which it does not qualify, because it’s nearly a year old; didn’t think it was necessary to discuss deletion of a redirect, when the same redirect exists, but without a period at the end of the link. KormiSK (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What? Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:41, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are more George Ws, this is not even the only “George W” president, there’s George Washington. 77qq 💬 contributions 03:47, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@77qq: I unbundled this from the nomination for John’s since I do not see the similarities between the two nominations at all to a point where a WP:TRAINWRECK is completely plausible. Steel1943 (talk) 05:46, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should be retargeted to Tau (mathematics), the number which is defined as τ = 2π. MEN KISSING (talk) 05:49, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Pi is the article on the mainstream mathematical concept covered by this redirect. The idea that it should be re-notationed as tau is WP:FRINGE and should not be treated as mainstream by retargeting this redirect. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:34, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I worry I’m about to dredge up the Pi vs Tau debate, which I would rather not do. But I don’t know if I agree that redirecting 2π to Tau is necessarily a treating of a WP:FRINGE theory as mainstream. The redirect is already currently targeting a discussion of the proposal of τ = 2π, relegated to one short paragraph with a link to the Tau article. So why not just send directly to the Tau article?
  Still, I can see your point. If so, the 2pi → Tau (mathematics) redirect is also of interest.
  Honestly, I see that there’s a lot of page history and consensuses for Tau on Wikipedia in general that I hadn’t accounted for and probably should have looked into before making this RfD. But I need to go to bed. MEN KISSING (talk) 09:34, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget as per nom and as a way to match 2pi; in addition, I’d like to point out that this redirect’s current target is due to the history of a former article that it used to target, Tau (2π). Said article is now a redirect that at one point pointed to Pi#In popular culture, but now points towards the Tau (mathematics) article. It also has EXTENSIVE history as a prior draft of the article that would become Tau (mathematics).Either way, if Tau is a WP:FRINGE idea, its notability shouldn’t be challenged here, with redirects pointing to it– it should be challenged on its own page. Which, I might add, has sufficient sources to establish notability, so it’s not going anywhere. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:12, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. Discussed at both places, but the redirect should pretty clearly go to the article dedicated to the main topic, not the summary-style mention in the broader article. It serves as a pretty decent place for anyone who may not land at quite the right spot but needs help getting directed to somewhere better too (including the main pi article). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:59, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Tau (mathematics) since it makes more sense than saying “it’s what you multiple the radius by to get the circumference“. Steel1943 (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak nom and not about deletion, so don’t worry too much

although mentioned in the lead, this is a little bit of a strange case, as most results i got seem to refer to just about every other type of interval that is vertical, with the primary topic being the intervals between contour lines, which is also the definition wiktionary goes with (if without citations or quotes), with a distant second being the vertical interval timecode, and somehow nearly no results actually related to vblank. that is to say, what do?

also, incoming links seem to refer to both the cartography definition and vblank, which is annoying consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:35, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete : this is really ridiculously unhelpful. Much as city might redirect to Chicago, it is simply a generic term redirecting to one very specific case. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:47, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Vertical interval is common shorthand for vertical blanking interval at least among video engineers. The other uses identified by the nom are not WP:PRIMARYTOPIC worthy so, at best, this should be converted to a disambig. ~Kvng (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Sure it is – just as “the city” is shorthand for Chicago amongst residents of Chicago. Imaginatorium (talk) 17:00, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If we lived in a world where Chicago was the only city in the world noteworthy enough for a Wikipedia article, I think it would make sense to redirect “city” there. I don’t find the comparison between Chicago and Vertical blanking intervals to be very apt. MEN KISSING (talk) 04:36, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  the problem here is that, even per your own vote below,. there are more plausible targets, but the closest we have to proof that any of them would actually be plausible targets are confused incoming links and a ptm consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m guessing this is considered a misspelling for “hinged” … but alas, it’s just a guess since it’s the closest title match I can fathom and I cannot find evidence of this misspelling being common or likely at all. But, either way, “inged” is not mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 07:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment: The argument here for the “keep”s and “refine”s seems to be that a reader may type the word without an “h” to get to the target article. That seems rather erroneous: The argument presented by these votes seems to be that someone may pronounce it this way, not that they would spell it this way. As a spelling, this redirect is both erroneous and technically not a phonetic spelling for the proper way to say the word. Steel1943 (talk) 22:56, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Implausible that readers would search by spelling with notoriously unconventional dropped-consonant pronunciation. Are we to offer Otel, Onor killing and Ypercorrection? Add House, Hours and Hole to the disambiguation pages Ouse, Ours and Ole? NebY (talk) 19:03, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected to List of Albania women’s international footballers, but also played for Kosovo national team. Svartner (talk) 13:10, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The previous AfD, which closed as redirect to this target, had two participants who both preferred redirecting despite the target being mentioned in two pages, so I am reluctant to vacate that as a soft consensus with no further participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 01:42, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]