August 28

Coromega

PCSO-524

Cardiovascular disease and saturated fat

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion waskeep.(non-admin closure)CycloneYoris^talk!06:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Cardiovascular disease and saturated fatCardiovascular disease and saturated fat →Saturated fat#Cardiovascular disease (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Saturated fat and heart diseaseSaturated fat and heart disease →Saturated fat#Cardiovascular disease (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete perWP:XYMdewman6 (talk)23:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The target is a section describing the relationship between saturated fat and cardiovascular disease. I do not see howWP:XY applies here. -Presidentmantalk ·contribs (Talkback)14:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a bit XY-ish because there is also discussion of the relationship between the two topics atCardiovascular disease#Diet, so there is discussion of the combination in two places. Sure, there are section hatnotes between them which helps alleviate XY concerns, but how do we determine which section to target? I guess we should follow X and Y -> X#Y? If so, perhaps retarget the first and keep the second?Mdewman6 (talk)20:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes more sense if they have the same target, and I don't see any particular reason to retarget to the section you mentioned.Presidentmantalk ·contribs (Talkback)15:31, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. These aren't unconnected subjects.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)11:22, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Arterycloggingsaturatedfat

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.✗plicit23:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Arterycloggingsaturatedfat →Saturated fat#Cardiovascular disease (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

We should not have redirects from search terms with no spaces. We do not have the correct form of this redirect,Artery clogging saturated fat. Delete.Mdewman6 (talk)22:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Could come underWP:R3 if it wasn't so old.Edward-Woodrow :)_[talk]

Edward-Woodrow :)_[talk]23:43, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The only way this might be plausible is if we assume the reader's spacebar is broken; I don't think we need spaceless redirects just in case. –Scyrme (talk)05:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Saturated fat and cardiovascular disease

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasspeedy keep. Withdrawing per talk page consensus and to preserve article history; hatnotes at target can address theWP:XY issue(non-admin closure)Mdewman6 (talk)23:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Saturated fat and cardiovascular diseaseSaturated fat and cardiovascular disease →Saturated fat#Cardiovascular disease (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Case ofWP:XY; both topics are discussed at target, but likewise there is discussion about saturated fat atCardiovascular disease#Diet, where this redirect is used in a section hatnote. We should not direct all users to one section or the other; instead delete the redirect and directly link to each section from each section in hatnotes.Mdewman6 (talk)22:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Polysaturated fat

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.✗plicit23:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Polysaturated fat →Saturated fat (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Polysaturated fats →Saturated fat (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There arepolyunsaturated fats, but there are no such things as polysaturated fats. Delete to avoid confusion; in fact I just corrected cases in several nutrition/health articles that had "polysaturated" when they appeared to mean "polyunsaturated".Mdewman6 (talk)22:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is an old one-sentence stub at the plural form.Mdewman6 (talk)22:45, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment as they are, they are not reasonable redirects. The only way as a{{R from misspelling}} or{{R from typo}} would work, would be to targetpolyunsaturated fats . So eitherdelete orretarget topolyunsaturated fatty acid as a misspelling/typo of "polyunsaturated fat(s)" --65.92.244.99 (talk)03:46, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: no mention anywhere.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)11:24, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The proper target isn't clear because it's ambiguous whether someone would be searching "polysaturated fats" because they've misspelled "polyunsaturated fats" or because they're unfamiliar with the terms and are looking for the saturated counterpart of "polyunsaturated fats" under the assumption that saturated and unsaturated fats both have poly- varieties. The redirect is more likely confuse readers/editors rather than help, especially if internal links show up in blue as if it's a correct a term. –Scyrme (talk)12:54, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Homosexuality legal in Brazil

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.✗plicit23:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Homosexuality legal in Brazil →Legal status of homosexuality in Brazil (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Delete per nom.Edward-Woodrow :)_[talk]20:52, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Boo: The ghost

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. Jay 💬19:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Boo: The ghost →Characters in the Mario franchise#Enemy characters (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Extremely unlikely search term. This barely gets used.QuicoleJR (talk)18:44, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - There is indeed a character named "Boo" who is a ghost, but the combination of colon use, capitalization, and 3 words used seems unlikely to me.Sergecross73msg me18:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Implausible phrasing. Created as a vandalism/spam article in 2007 and redirected that same year. I wouldn't object to creating more plausibly phrased redirects likeBoo the ghost orBoo the Ghost, if others feel their existence is warranted. –Scyrme (talk)20:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term per the above.Utopes_{(talk /cont)}21:26, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Sergecross73 and Scyrme.〜Askarion✉14:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above.InterstellarGamer12321 (talk |contribs)18:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Mario's First Love Interest

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.✗plicit23:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Mario's First Love Interest →Characters in the Mario franchise#Pauline (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very unlikely search term. The redirect is barely ever used.QuicoleJR (talk)18:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say it's "very" unlikely. It seems plausible to me that readers may forget Pauline's name and try to look her up as "Mario's first love interest". The most unlikely thing about this is redirect is the capitalisation.Mario's first love interest seems more plausible and there are webpages that describe her in this exact way. –Scyrme (talk)21:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a note, this character actually has an entire article not just a list entry:Pauline (Nintendo). That article mentions that "Pauline debuted as Mario's love interest". –Scyrme (talk)21:28, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unlikely search term, and Wikipedia is not a search engine.Utopes_{(talk /cont)}21:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom.Veverve (talk)05:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Young Toadsworth

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. Jay 💬19:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Young Toadsworth →Characters in the Mario franchise#Toadsworth (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term that is barely used as a redirect. Also, the topic is only implicitly mentioned.QuicoleJR (talk)18:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - nothing more than an allusion to the younger days of an older character. No idea why someone would ever search for that.Sergecross73msg me18:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: nonsensical.Veverve (talk)05:28, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Jugem's Cloud

Dr. E.Gadd

Ludwing von Koopa

Yoshi Demo

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. Jay 💬19:30, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Yoshi Demo →Yoshi's Story#Game Boy Advance tech demo (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Too ambiguous.Yoshi's Crafted World has a demo available, which takes up many of the Google search results.QuicoleJR (talk)18:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. What it's referring to, in reality, is an interesting footnote in theYoshi series of games. But the phrase "Yoshi Demo" is too vague to refer to it, more specific redirects should be used instead.Sergecross73msg me18:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Zhang-zhung

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasretarget both to Zhangzhung. Jay 💬19:33, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Zhang-zhungZhang-zhung →Zhangzhung (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Zhang-ZhungZhang-Zhung →Zhang-Zhung language (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These should have the same target. The kingdom is probably the primary topic.1234qwer1234qwer415:41, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both toZhangzhung. The language is also described there with a link to the main article.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)17:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget toZhangzhung per nom.Utopes_{(talk /cont)}21:24, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom and move language article toZhangzhung language, its Glottolog name, for consistency.— kwami (talk)22:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  The latter should be discussed through aWP:RM (if that needs discussion).1234qwer1234qwer415:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

How do you do, fellow kids?

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasretarget toSteve Buscemi#Reception and image. Jay 💬11:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• How do you do, fellow kids?How do you do, fellow kids? →The Tuxedo Begins (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention on target page. The point of the redir is that a phrase from an Internet meme originates from this TV episode, but without a mention at target it's unlikely to be useful. A user who wants info about the meme's origin should browse KnowYourMeme rather than Wikipedia.Gaioa (TCL)11:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget toSteve Buscemi#Reception and image, where the meme is described. It does not use these words but it's not ambiguous.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)17:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Ivanvector's points.Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on mytalk page)17:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above.Sergecross73msg me18:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per the above.Utopes_{(talk /cont)}21:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per the above. -Presidentmantalk ·contribs (Talkback)21:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Have sex with

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion waskeep. Jay 💬11:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Have sex withHave sex with →Sexual intercourse (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nominating for the same reasonHaving sex with was deleted: redirect was only made to fix a redlink, and non-printworthy sounding title.Colgatepony234 (talk)23:11, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom --Lenticel^(talk)01:01, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Unlikely search term.〜Askarion✉11:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, since "have sex with" is a common phrase and thus a likely search term, and theviews are quite strong (at 2 or 3 per day).Duckmather (talk)15:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Redirect is directly used in two articles, and it seems to be entirely unambiguous. Nothing harmful in this one. —Red-tailed hawk _(nest)03:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,CycloneYoris^talk!06:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the above.Edward-Woodrow :)_[talk]12:15, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - a common phrase but context-dependent; any uses of the phrase in an article should be piped to the intended target, not have vague, sentence-fragment redirects created for one of several possible uses.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)16:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep. This seems to be a slightly different scenario than "having sex with" in terms of being a redirect, although it could be the same. I don't think that the phrase "Have sex with" is necessarily incomplete; it can very well be a complete search term describing the verb/action of "fuck". It is very common imo to include the word "with" following the action of "having sex", and I do think that the phrase "have sex with" is more closely equivalent to "sexual intercourse" (the current target) than even the term "have sex" is (without the "with"). The act to "have sex with" I feel is exactly what sexual intercourseis. Oftentimes a word like "with" doesn't fit at the end of a title, but in this particular case I think the phrase "have sexwith" is inexplicably linked with "sexual intercourse" word-for-word. (This was quite a silly explanation I will admit, lol. Truly a contribution of time.)Utopes_{(talk /cont)}22:35, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There's no policy-based reason to delete. To "have sex with" means to "havesexual intercourse with".Shhhnotsoloud (talk)11:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Chip Gaines

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasrestored article.(non-admin closure)CycloneYoris^talk!04:10, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Chip Gaines →Fixer Upper (TV series) (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I think this would be better targeted atJoanna Gaines as{{R from spouse}} because that article contains more substantive information about him than the current target.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)10:26, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly I think he should have his own page restored rather than redirect at all. He has a long career, bestselling books, etc., much (though of course not all) of which is separate and distinct from his wife. This is on my to-do list if no one else does so.Sneakers2929 (talk)08:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Restore article or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,CycloneYoris^talk!06:47, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore per Sneakers2929. It seems plausible that Chip Gaines is notable on his own terms. -Presidentmantalk ·contribs (Talkback)12:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore – since the article was redirected at AFD in 2017, I think the notability concerns have been resolved. I can get a few additional pieces of news coverage in to clear notability guidelines tomorrow, though I'm not great with biographies.Skarmory(talk •contribs)17:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

Adoption in China

Europe's Strongest Man champions

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasspeedy delete criterionR3. Clearly created in error.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)16:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Europe's Strongest Man champions →Template:Europe's Strongest Man champions (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No internal or external links as the redirect was made automatically due to a namespace change from article to templateBrandon Downes (talk)03:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).

1834 edition

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.✗plicit04:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• 1834 edition →Gustav Leberecht Flügel#Works, Translations, Critical Essays and Articles (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The expression is way too vague, I proposedeletion.Veverve (talk)02:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. -Presidentmantalk ·contribs (Talkback)12:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as absurdly vague. This can refer to any written thing inCategory:1834 works and multiple events linked from1834 in sports. Needless to say, that a lot of articles.Glades12 (talk)16:17, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep in the absence of a better target. The term "1834 edition" refers rather unambiguously to an edition of theQuran published by Flügel in 1834, unambiguous in the sense that there aren't other works likely to be known by this name. It is mentioned very briefly in the Quran article, and even more briefly in identical text in bothCairo edition andHistory of the Quran, but there's so little content I don't think any of these are a better target than the current one. There is also an edition ofPhillis Wheatley's poetry, considered the first published poetry by an African-American author, which was re-published as a memoir in 1834, but that's also hardly mentioned in her bio and I don't think that's a better target anyway.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)16:49, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sure, in the context of editions of the Quran1834 edition may refer unambiguously to Flügel's edition, but in other contexts it refers equally unambiguously to 1834 editions of other things. I can find no evidence that "1834 edition" is used to refer to Flügel's Quran except when the fact that it is a Quran is clear from context. (I note that bothCairo edition andHistory of the Quran refer to it as "Flugel's 1834 edition", whileQuran says "Flügel published an edition of the Quran in 1834")Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk)09:53, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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'stalk page or in adeletion review).