Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 12

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 00:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• M. Sampath → Kalutara Town Club  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the targeted article. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Can probably be deleted, was a holding redirect if a List page for Kalutara cricketers was created, no list seems to be forthcoming. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 10:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. A7V2 (talk) 07:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 to Trol, which is now a DAB page per discussion below. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• TROL → Vitamin A  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is, accoring to the template on the redirect page, a redirect from the international non-prorietary name of a drug, but this name isn't mentioned anywhere at the target and I can't find that it is a commonly used name. The google hits are primarily irrelevant or OCR errors for "control". An exception is a brand-name anti-acne product but vitamin A is just one of several ingredients (c.f. WP:XY). Thryduulf (talk) 20:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate, retarget to trol which should be dismabiguated per my comment at the RfD for Trol (also in this day's RfD list). -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • DRAFTed disambig at Trol also under RfD. This can redirect to that -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 15:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• If the consensus at #Trol is to redirect then I support retargetting this there. I do not support pointing this to Troll if the outcome of the other discussion is keep. Thryduulf (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to trol if it's made a disambig at its RfD. Jay (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:20, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Trol → Troll  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible misspelling; ambiguous. Qwerfjkltalk 18:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this misspellin [sic] per nom. NotReallySoroka (talk) 18:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. According to Wiktionary, this does mean "troll" in a few languages including Dutch, Portuguese and Spanish but none of the languages meet WP:RFOREIGN. Thryduulf (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per below. Thryduulf (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 1.23 pageviews/day isn't bad for a misspelling. What else could it be ambiguous with, especially since this differs only in a non-repeated l. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:24, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment it's clearly not implausible since it is the omission of a letter, a very common type of typo -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate Apparently News from the Republic of Letters is called "TRoL" according to the article, The Review of Litigation is "TROL", AK Trolls is also "Trol", and a see also for troll (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • DRAFTED disambig in the trol redirect page. The other RfD TROL should redirect to this new disambig page as well -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 15:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    (edit conflict) I don't mind disambiguation instead. ― Qwerfjkltalk 15:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambig per the draft by user65. Jay (talk) 13:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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. As unopposed deletion nomination. Jay (talk) 13:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Words (in Canon Law) → Interpretation (Catholic canon law)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

To state that words in canon law all relate to legal interpretations is already a big stretch, but to say that the very idea of words in canon law relates to how Catholic canon law is interpreted is a big Catholic bias and misleading. Furthermore, the capitalisation is wrong.
I recommend deletion. There is no good retarget, as no article on WP is about how words in canon law are, and there is the capitalisation error. Veverve (talk) 16:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 08:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• MOS:CAPTION → Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Captions  ([[Talk:MOS:CAPTION|talk]] · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• MOS:CAPTIONS → Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Captions  ([[Talk:MOS:CAPTIONS|talk]] · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MOS:caption → Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Captions  ([[Talk:MOS:caption|talk]] · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I think the shortcut must be retargeted to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions, which is its own guideline about "captions". The guideline is clearer than the rule seen in the current target. Furthermore, I think many editors must have used the shortcut to refer to rules about caption, right? George Ho (talk) 08:37, 7 February 2022 (UTC); edited, 18:44, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is MOS:CAPTIONS not also being discussed? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added MOS:caption to the bundle. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to add MOS:CAPTIONS to the discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 13:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The current target is a guideline about captions, with a pointer to the proposed target for more information. Not seeing a strong reason to change that. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I cannot figure out what this discussion seeks to achieve, but I use this shortcut often. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @SandyGeorgia the nomination seeks to change the shortcut to point to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions (the subpage) rather than the current section Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Captions. George Ho feels the subpage is "clearer" than the section and thinks that many editors are expecting it to point to that target. Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, Thryduulf! In that case, I Oppose the proposed change to the redirect; the main MOS page is better watched and better tended, and we should be pointing to it, as we currently do. If a sub-page of MOS is out of sync (a common problem), that is solved by editing, but we should be pointing at the better watched page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:12, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There may be hypothetical sense to a preference of redirection to a dedicated subpage rather than to a section in a more general guideline, but I don't find "The guideline is clearer than the rule seen in the current target" to be substantive or adequate. What is unclear in the latter? Why could a lack of clarity not be resolved by editing? What consideration has been made of current usage and the current target's apparently unproblematic use for nearly 14 years? Where is substantiation of the implicit concern that this is not redirecting as users intend? I, similarly, do not see that sufficient basis for change has been presented. Эlcobbola _talk 17:55, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All right, all right. Maybe "clearer" is not the right word. How about "more detailed" instead? To explain further, the current title describes how to format a caption and what captions are. The subpage describes that captions can be a case-by-case basis as well as "criteria for a good caption" and "special situations". Are those differences between the two targets substantial, or must I describe more? Whenever I used a shortcut, I must have assumed it targets to the subpage. George Ho (talk) 18:44, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CAPTION targets to the subpage. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yet I still forget the distinction between the two, especially when "MOS" is used. George Ho (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. We have two different pieces of text about captions. One is simple and concise and starts "Photographs and other graphics should have captions..."

The other starts "A caption is text that appears below an image. [a] Most captions draw attention to something in the image that is not obvious, such as its relevance to the text." Embedded in this initial sentence is a note [a] that refers to "mathematical formulae, very small tables, compact family trees, small charts, and other templated, compact output of a graphical nature." Do we really want a novice editor to have to read this mind-boggling complexity when all you want to do is gently remind them that "photographs should have captions"?

The first text needs a shortcut. MOS:CAPTION is as good as any. Hallucegenia (talk) 18:36, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 13:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox elections by state → Template:Infobox U.S. presidential elections by state  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Template:Infobox elections by state/doc → Template:Infobox U.S. presidential elections by state/doc  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This title was not concise and proper, and thus I recently moved its contents to a more proper title as per the function served by this template, according to point 3 of WP:TG. And thus, I propose that this redirect be deleted as an implausible and improper redirect. (Targeted template is to be used only in 52 articles for the presidential elections in the 50 states + DC + Guam. All of the current incoming links from those articles are also changed accordingly.) ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 10:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all: not every election takes place in the US. Veverve (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 speedily deleted per G14. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 08:15, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Double flute (disambiguation) → Double flute  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target is not a disambiguation page, and I'm not sure it's sufficiently "disambiguation-like" to retain this redirect, which in practice helps no-one. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as harmless, the page is primarily a list of "some forms of double flute" and seems like the only reasonable target for the redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 21:33, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 07:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• La Novia → La novia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is circular because La Novia redirects to La novia, and La novia redirects back to the same page, that is La Novia. Vitaium (talk) 08:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both to "La novia" (song), which is credibly asserted to be WP:PTOPIC over La novia (film). A WP:PRECISE swap will be needed. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 09:27, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget La Novia to La novia and move La novia (song) to La novia as it is the main topic. --Bedivere (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• After this discussion was opened, La novia (song) was moved to La novia via a WP:ROUNDROBIN swap. Since the issue has been resolved, I think we can safely close this discussion. - Eureka Lott 17:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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. MBisanz ^talk 01:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Bicolor coat pattern → Bicolor cat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned specifically in the target article. Without a specific reference to "cat" in the title of this redirect, readers searching this term could potentially be looking for some sort of Coat pattern. Steel1943 (talk) 20:16, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: no proper retarget, too vague (may refer to fur, coat, coat of arms, and probably other things). Veverve (talk) 11:53, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, unless there is mention at other articles in enwiki. It's mentioned at the target, though not an exact text match. Jay (talk) 20:42, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as ambiguous and likely to cause confusion. A searcher looking for an article about biclor cats will soon find it without this redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:30, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 at Moggie. (non-admin closure) feminist #StandWithUkraine🇺🇦 (talk) 05:28, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Moggy → Cat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Moggie → Cat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Moggies → Cat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This term seems to refer to a mixed breed cat; the term "moggy" is mentioned in the article once, but it's in a section that is not specifically about the subject. I'm also not able to find an alternative retargeting option for these redirects. For these reasons, I believe these redirects should be deleted per WP:REDLINK unless there's a more descriptive retargeting option I am apparently not able to find/determine. Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• ...I just discovered that Moggy has history as an article: [1]. Maybe restore the article, retarget all the other redirects there, and then ... maybe nominate the article for WP:AFD since the aforementioned revision looks as though the article may need to survive an AFD to remain live? Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Mixed breed where I added a cited mention. I'm also fine with sending Moggy to AFD per WP:BLAR although I would still have the same retarget suggestion in said theoretical AfD. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. wikt:moggy has "A domestic cat, especially (depreciative or derogatory) a non-pedigree or unremarkable cat." A moggy isn't necessarily mixed breed. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:34, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambig. Between the rambling hatnote and article text the last article version says it can mean cats in general, mixed breed cat, Common Moorhen. Morris Minor, any car made by the Morgan Motor Company, "Mogadon" (Nitrazepam) and mouse. Thryduulf (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate per Thryduulf. It's a nickname for several people and cars. Drafted at Moggie (mainly since that lemma has no history), restricting to items which currently meet WP:DABMENTION. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate. I've added another nickname to the draft (with a hidden citation, in case anyone wants to add it to the article; it's already DABMENTIONed). Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 09:33, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 to Frozen. (non-admin closure) Qwerfjkltalk 10:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Frozenness → Fear  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I think it's pretty clear that this redirect should point to Freezing, but at this point two editors have seen fit to point it to Fear so I'm bringing this here to seek a consensus. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Agree with freezing. Five dictionaries and wiktionary all have freezing–cold as the primary definition with other forms of immobility as secondary/tertiary definitions.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 17:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. We can add Fear to the disambiguation pages Freezing (disambiguation) and Frozen if desired, though I don't really think it's necessary. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 17:46, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Frozen consistent with wikt:frozenness: "The quality of being frozen." I've added an entry to Frozen for Fear. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:41, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Frozen per Shhhnotsoloud --Lenticel ^(talk) 11:35, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants disagree on what target would suit this best. Should we retarget to Freezing or to Frozen?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:57, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to DAB page Frozen per above. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Frozen, it seems closer to the meaning than Freezing per Shhhh. Rusalkii (talk) 21:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I tweaked Shhhnotsoloud's edit to make it clear that out of Freezing and Fear we have a clear primary target. Other than that I concur. CapnZapp (talk) 09:56, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @CapnZapp: Actually the primary topic for Frozen is not Freezing, or it would redirect there. Perhaps it should, but it doesn't. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry but your comment "or it would redirect there" makes no sense. The only way I can make any sense of it is if you are suggesting we need to choose between either a redirect or a disambiguation page with no primary target. But that is just wrong - see MOS:DABPRIMARY. Nobody wants it to "redirect there" - as the DAB page shows there are several secondary topics or "individual entries". Since this is so strange, I think I'll hold off until tomorrow before I undo your revert. (Do note I am not editing the redirect for discussion Frozenness, I am editing Frozen the DAB page). CapnZapp (talk) 07:37, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • @CapnZapp: I think you are misunderstanding "primary topic". The disambiguation page Frozen is at the base name and so by definition there is no primary topic for "Frozen" (and if there were it would probably be a film). See Talk:Frozen#Primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Wikipedia:NOT A DICTIONARY. The current target doesn't mention it. There is one incoming link at Emotion classification where the meaning given is "Fear + Anger". Other than having or pointing to an article where the psychological state of being frozen in fear is described, there is no reason to have a page at this title. Jay (talk) 04:02, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Government Office → Government Offices for the English Regions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It should be redirected elsewhere deleted since the words "Government Office" are too generic to be reduced to this particular Office. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Which particular "somewhere else" do you think it should target? The term is a very plausible search term for the target given they are frequently referred to as just "Government Office". Is that term actually used for anything else or is it only ambiguous in theory? Thryduulf (talk) 13:00, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The words “Government Office”, in isolation, can refer to governmental offices, both in the sense of where citizens can get official help, and in the sense of the governmental bureaus.

For example, when I Google that phrase, it shows things about my local and national governments’ offices. NotReallySoroka (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is a plausible search but wikipedia should not have articles/redirects for all plausible searches. If we cannot target something useful it is better to leave the user with zero search hits, sending the signal they need to refine their search. In this case there's no chance searching for "Government Office" will give you what you want without further qualifiers. (Also remember: Wikipedia's search is much less sophisticated than Google's. I am sure Google can use your private data such as search history, previous purchases, ads clicked, location info and so on, to make a search such as "Government Office" useful to you, but none of that applies to Wikipedia (and what a good thing that is!) CapnZapp (talk) 07:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as hopelessly generic/ambiguous, to allow uninhibited search. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 14:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Narky Blert. There seems to be no good retarget, and also WP:REDYES. Veverve (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This can never help, only hinder CapnZapp (talk) 07:38, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these articles. ✗plicit 04:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Lógica → Logic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Logika → Logic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 02:18, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Sottogioco → Subgame  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Gioco bayesiano → Bayesian game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Gioco in forma estesa → Extensive-form game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Gioco in forma normale → Normal-form game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Gioco dinamico → Sequential game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Gioco ripetuto → Repeated game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Strategia (teoria dei giochi) → Strategy (game theory)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Dominanza (teoria dei giochi) → Strategic dominance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Italian game-theory WP:FORREDs with no affinity to target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom, not finding any English language results in a search. Rusalkii (talk) 21:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Unendlichkeit → Infinity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE: No affinity to German (though Cantor did invent some terminology for transfinite arithmetic, this term is older and not described at the target anyway). Unendlich does not provide any helpful targets either. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 02:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Dezimalsystem → Decimal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE: No affinity to German. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 02:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Physikalische Technik → Engineering physics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE: No affinity to German. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these articles. ✗plicit 04:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Struktur → Structure  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Sozialstruktur → Social structure  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE: No affinity to German. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:58, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Mathematikhistoriker → History of mathematics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE; translates to the non-existent mathematics historian. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:50, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RLOTE. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Tammy Jo → Murder of Tammy Alexander  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely and unhelpful redirect from two given names. Other people with this name combination are described at Tammy Jo Kirk, Murder of Tammy Zywicki, Kimberly Frost, Rodney Atkins#Personal life, and sundry others. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Risposta ottima → Best response  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE. The concept of "best response" has no particular affinity for Italian. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:54, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Mathematikunterricht → Mathematics education  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE Noting particularly German about mathematics education. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:52, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Equilibrio di Nash perfetto nei sottogiochi → Subgame perfect equilibrium  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE No connection between this bit of game theory and Italian, mass created by a user using an unauthorised bot. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RLOTE. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Juego de la Distribución de la Cerveza → Beer distribution game  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RLOTE. No connection between this piece of game theory and Spanish 192.76.8.77 (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.