Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I would oppose this retarget. A character in a book is different from a character in a TV show based on a book. Obviously the current target is no good, but since this character is not mentioned at Silverwing (novel), I think deletion is better. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 00:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
an alternate spelling of "sarsenet", a type of silk fabric. unmentioned in the target, though there are mentions of both spellings in other articles (but only two incoming links), and it gets steady views, so maybe there's a more fitting target i'm missing? cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)12:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
"Sarcenet" does not mean "silk ribbon", but was a kind of silk fabric used for bed hangings and curtains, reference Clive Edwards, Encyclopedia of Furnishising Textiles (2007), p. 184.Unoquha (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
This redirect has been proposed for deletion a couple of time using various unsuitable processes like PROD or inadmissible CSDs. However, the corresponding stub on the Albanian Misplaced Pages has recently been deleted (see sq:Arben Isaraj) and the person here is not mentioned at target and there is no source for their association with the party, so it may be best to delete. —Kusma (talk) 19:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Support Τhe fact that we need to discuss, spend other people's time and burden the various procedures for such obvious things is a sign of a bureaucratic mentality that could usefully be avoided. LefterDalaka (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
incomplete-shaped jugemu redirects
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.
missing the "chōsuke". if you'll write jugemu jugemu gokō-no surikire kaijarisuigyo-no suigyōmatsu unraimatsu fūraimatsu kuunerutokoro-ni sumutokoro yaburakōji-no burakōji paipo paipo paipo-no shūringan shūringan-no gūrindai gūrindai-no ponpokopī-no ponpokonā-no chōkyūmei-no chōsuke's name, i expect you'll at least have the decency to write the whole thing. get nippon egao hyakkei'd lol cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)19:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).
either only mentioned in passing or unmentioned. those places (not zones, sonic cd doesn't call them zones) are really as notable on their own as any other zone not named green hill, stardust speedway, or death egg. admittedly a little iffy on metallic madness, though, as it was also in maniacogsan(nag me)(stalk me)18:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Not mentioned at the target, and interpreted this way as a general phrase, could just as likely refer to Age disparity in sexual relationships, but it's even more ambiguous, as this tends to be a catch phrase used by older folks as a slogan that life doesn't have to slow down when you get old, as for active seniors, or just people who feel young at heart, etc. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:34, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete If a person is searching this phrase up instead of a more conventional search term, then they are most likely looking for information about the phrase itself, which the current target does not provide. Ca01:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete. This is a bit of a surprising redirect; the way it's being used is to refer to a tongue-in-cheek joke about relationships with minors, which is different than the ordinary way that this is used (to generally talk about age gaps in relationships, or to comment on someone's appearance). I don't see a good place for this to point, and thus I favor deletion. — Red-tailed hawk(nest)06:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. If this does not get deleted, someone please make sure it ends up with a {{R from non-neutral name}}. Tessaract216:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I did mark this as reviewed with the thought process that it's an entirely incorrect term, but it leads to a relevant article about what someone searching the incorrect terminology may have actually been looking for. I recognize it may too non-neutral to be an accepted redirect, and I will mentally recalibrate if this ends up deleted. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom, but as a note to Hey man im josh: I think that's a reasonable idea and I don't disagree with your thought process. If this does not get deleted, someone please make sure it ends up with a {{R from non-neutral name}}. Tessaract216:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
As per WP:RDELETE points 2 and 10, this redirect not only could plausibly be expanded into into an article (See prior edit history), but also creates significant confusion (The primary article linking to this is Chongqing, which this redirects back to, creating a recursive link) - Additionally, there are next to no pageviews (Prior to proposing this redirect be deleted), suggesting that it's not used frequently Gmoat (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
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.
same-ish rationale as worms, animals below, but "helminth" refers to parasitic worms, so even if not deleted, it points to the wrong target (and the right one doesn't mention antigens or antibodies). could also be a case of xy, thinking about it cogsan(nag me)(stalk me)13:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The title of this nomination made me chuckle. Further thoughts on retargeting to Helminth protein? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris23:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Retarget or Delete? Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬10:52, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Retarget to Helminth protein. It's not WP:XY but a "Lastname, Firstname" for something that isn't the name of a person. I thought that'd make it wildly implausible, but I checked the pageviews and there was a weirdly high count in October so these might get some usage. Tessaract216:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).
Both should point to "Wader (American)", I don't really see any evidence that the term "wading bird" is regularly used for waders/shorebirds in any part of the world. TBH "Wader (American)" is a bizarre title that should probably be moved to "Wading bird". Somatochlora (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
I came here from an article linking wading bird as a more general term. Depending on how this closes, someone might want to retarget those types of links. Its usage onwiki can be found here. Clovermoss🍀(talk)06:20, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Same question as the prvious relist. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬10:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
These have significant pre-merge edit history for Political appointments of the first Trump administration, but this title does not differentiate between first or second term. Not sure whether to redirect it to 1st term article or to the disambiguation page. Should we move it to a title mentioning "first presidency" without leaving a redirect? —CX Zoom21:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
(Nominations) Create dab page to First term#Indy Intel Agencies, First term#Other Indy Agencies, Second term#Indy Intel Agencies, Second term#Other Indy Agencies.
Archaic term that I see used in older texts to refer to corals. However, what's more relevant for us is Richard Dawkins' book The Ancestor's Tale in which he notes that "coral" is ambiguous between the organisms themselves and the hard stuff their colonies leave behind. He ressurects the older term "polypifer" to refer to the organisms. Thus, it would seem that coral polyp is the optimal target. But that page redirects to the nom's proposed target, which discusses polyps generally, not just those of corals, I think. The problem is that Polyp (zoology) discusses polyps generally, unrestricted to corals while coral discusses much more about corals than the living polyps themselves. Sigh. Refining to Coral#Anatomy could be quite nice, and I think I prefer that target over the nom's proposal, which is my second choice. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 01:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
To me, at least, "dating style" could easily refer to a romantic context in the sense of casual vs. serious, short-term vs. long-term relationship etc. as much as DMY OR YMD etc. Presidentmantalk · contribs (Talkback) 21:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Retarget to the Dating (disambiguation) per the others. "Dating style" is far more likely to refer to romantic dating...if you're looking for calendars, you'd use "date style", not "dating", otherwise it sounds more like it would refer to types of radiometric dating, which would still be a better target than the calendar article. But either way, it's pretty vague, and the dab page is the way to go. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete Let the search function do its job, it does not need retargeting to a DAB page which would arguably be unhelpful for those searching specifically for "dating style". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Keep - "make" is a clear synonym for brand. This is what is being requested, and this is what the target provides. Fieari (talk) 06:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
(Keep) It's possible, but much more likely Misplaced Pages. Even if they aren't, they should see their error, so I don't think a hat note is necessary. All the best: RichFarmbrough13:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC).
13:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete since having it means the user won't see the error. Better to see a redlink. But then I'd feel that way about most bad typos, so why do we generally make redirects for such things? Dicklyon (talk) 16:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
We have redirects for if someone makes the mistake, they still get there. By your logic, every single typo redirect should be deleted. CheeseyHead (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
This redirect's usecase of the reader searching this misspelt term dwarfs that of the editor mistyping a link. J947 ‡ 01:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Keep as highly used. On the off chance that the reader is indeed looking for Wikimedia, there are links in the first paragraph and infobox of the current target. J947 ‡ 01:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete as yet another one of billions of possible typos, no more deserving a redirect than any other. This one is especially not deserving since, as pointed out, there are multiple possible resolutions. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete per J947; ambiguous typo could mean multiple things; WP, WMF, "Wiki?edia" jargon used at WMF/MW to refer to project X that is a wiki -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 09:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
I do not think it likely that someone would search for this long of a string even though it's part of the lyrics of the poem. Even if someone was unfamiliar how to search it, it's likely that it would be "because you are love" and variations thereupon. So, I think this redirect should be deleted. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:05, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
And the universe said keep. This line is quoted in full in the article. The use of the "and the universe said" motif is discussed in the article's prose, citing the Irish Independent. And a tattoo of this exact quote appears in the article, a freely-licensed re-shoot of a photo used in Gough's blog post about the poem, which repeatedly invokes (a slightly misquoted version of) the line. I think that's enough to establish the significance of the complete line. (Note: I created the target article, but did not create this redirect.) -- Tamzin (they|xe|🤷) 07:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
And the universe said "screw the joke-y !keep text i was gonna do because Tamzin beat me to it"
Keep – the whole "not viable search result" argument falls flat considering the quote is likely to pop up on a suggested target when typing the search in. Also, full quote indeed stands in article. BarntToust12:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Not a recognised synonym of the species it is redirected to. Absent from BacDrive, LPSN, and Uniprot - referenced in target article (which needs to be moved anyway) but seemingly by mistake. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 01:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Does not generally seem to be the Primary Topic for "Breena". From my searching, it seems to generally refer to a Magic The Gathering character, but in general I can't find much about Breena. Casablanca 🪨00:03, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Weak disambiguate this term. There's also Breena Clarke and Breena Palmer, which I'm not 100% sure is enough for a disambiguation page. I also can't find anything about Breena the Demagogue (the Magic: The Gathering character in question, who may or may not be worth mentioning on this disambiguation page) or how this name is connected to Sabrina Carpenter other than her playing some characters with that name (I get it, "Breena" might be used as a diminuitive and/or nickname for "Sabrina," but still, I'm not sure how Carpenter is known by that name). I've drafted a disambiguation page below the redirect. Regards, SONIC67804:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, disambiguate. For me, a Google Books query for the term doesn't bring up Carpenter at all. Even just the existence of two people with the given name is quite sufficient, because we know there's a contingent of readers who look up names, mostly to get to biographies, but also to learn about the names themselves. --Joy (talk) 14:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
.jpg)