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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting to bundle the variants. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Tavix(talk)22:51, 28 June 2025 (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).
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.
Weak delete or retarget toSeating assignment (whereReserved seating redirects) (my preference between the two has changed multiple times while writing this comment). Seating assignment is the closest encyclopaedic content that I can find, but that article is about seating in entertainment venues not other places that might have reserved or unreserved seating such as transport or governmental assemblies (Reserved seats redirects toReserved political positions, although I'm not sure it should). There is almost certainly scope for at least a broad concept article about seat reservations in general and that would be the best target for this.Thryduulf (talk)11:35, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Seating assignment per Thryduulf whereGeneral seating redirects. Although I think that and Unreserved seat should be refined to #General_admission that says it isalso known as open seating or free seating. Agree with Presidentman about the expansion. Jay 💬07:39, 25 June 2025 (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).
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.
Julie N oil spill originally misspelled the name of the ship involved in the oil spill as "Julie N.", with the period at the end. This redirect used to point to "Julie N. oil spill" (with a period after the N) -- an article whose name was corrected to "Julie N oil spill" (no period). This redirect is an orphan and also not the name of the ship. Alternatively it might make sense to move this redirect to "Julie N," but I don't really think a redirect would be useful there regardless. —tony20:01, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (and createJulie N). This is both a plausible search term and a{{R from move}}, both reasons to keep, and this appears to be the closest thing to a primary topic. We have a few articles about people called Julie with surnames starting with N, but none of them are particularly known by their first name and initial, so a hatnote toJulie (given name)#People (and expanding that list) would be sufficient.Thryduulf (talk)21:17, 28 June 2025 (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).
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.
Keep. The target is the primary topic for these redirects. It is, by far, the most populated place of all the Readings. Sure, there are many other towns with the name, but the one in England is the primary topic for a geographical place.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)18:49, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with that target is that it doesn't include entries for things explicitly called "Reading Town" - and generally they shouldn't be as they are just partial title matches for "Reading".Thryduulf (talk)21:12, 28 June 2025 (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).
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.
GateauGateau currently targetsLayer cake, so probably should be bundled. I think it is targeted there as based (perhaps) onThe French term gâteau is used for a cake in France, and in the UK it means a layer cake. being in layer cake. I think gâteau is common enough in English in names of cakes that doing something with it makes sense rather than a redlink and depending on search results?Skynxnex (talk)14:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then we might as well target both toCake, since someone searching for "Gâteau" will probably be looking for the article about cake, not just a mention of the French word.🌳BalsamCottonwood (talk)✝23:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like both to redirect to the same place. Looking at some high-quality sources, we see:
These days, it's usually a rich, elaborately decorated cake.[1][2]
In its original English use (c. Victorian era), it was any kind of cake, and even things that weren't really cake, but had some cake-like qualities.[3] It even included moldedrice puddings.[4] Elaborately decorated layer cakes became the more popular use later.[5]
In last half-century, it typically uses a boring sponge cake, but this is not inherent; what matters is the cream (and often fruit) filling and decorations.[6]
Overall, I think that pointing both atCake is slightly better, as that encompasses all of the historical, modern, and French meanings, but it is not unreasonable to point them both atLayer cake.WhatamIdoing (talk)19:49, 28 June 2025 (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).
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 wasno consensus. As no one prefers the status quo, I have retargettedAerial apparatus toFire engine#Aerial apparatus per the longstanding target at the alternative capitalization. There is some disagreement about hatnote targets so it did not seem appropriate to include that in the close.Shhhnotsoloud,Daask, feel free to work out hatnote target(s) through normal editorial processes.Rusalkii (talk)20:34, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably refers to a flying machine, but that is not mentioned in the disambig being targetted under technology. I am unsure if it can refer to something else. Should be retarget this somewhere, update the disambig or just delete? Linked from only a single new article (formerly, it was just a rough translation whichI corrected). A potential better redirect target, if we want to keep this curio, could beflying machine.Piotrus at Hanyang| reply here05:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬13:40, 28 June 2025 (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).
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 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).
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 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).
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 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).
Acceleration, Reconnection, Turbulence and Electrodynamics of the Moon’s Interaction with the Sun
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.
Keep: Someone who navigates by URL and pastes the full name from outside of Wikipedia should be taken to the correct article.Jruderman (talk)08:32, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jruderman. Even someone who pastes this into a search engine should be taken straight to the only target they can be looking for rather than forced to unnecessarily go via search results.Thryduulf (talk)10:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you getting this phrase with a curly apostrophe? Nobody's going to type this, so it's not plausible without a source for copying.Nyttend (talk)10:30, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
AFAICT the default settings on smartphones create curly quotes. I do appreciate you creating a redirect from the straight quote, but it's not unreasonable to keep the other. If we keep it, then we should add{{R from alternative punctuation}} and mark it as unprintworthy.WhatamIdoing (talk)22:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why is taking people directly to the content they are looking for "useless"? What are the benefits of forcing them to make (sometimes several, depending on multiple factors we have no control over) extra clicks/taps and load more data?Thryduulf (talk)19:03, 30 June 2025 (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).
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.
Bundle. Ignore the mostly irrelevant question of whether theseshould be subject to G8 (they currently are not, because the target page exists), just nominate them for deletion as a batch.Thryduulf (talk)10:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for same reason as the deleted redirect. (Though really this title is the one that would be a correct article title. The one with "Ga." would properly be an avoided double redirect as a redirect from the footnote-style Bluebook abbreviation (likeBrown v. Bd. of Educ.), which article titles don't use as explained atMOS:LAW#US bulletpoint 2.) ~ Jenson (SilverLocust💬)06:25, 2 July 2025 (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).
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.
Delete. There's no clear target for these redirects, and they are confusing. Most other countries don't have similar "officials" redirects.Adumbrativus (talk)07:01, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The first (Chinese) is ambiguous with modern officials and has only one incoming link. The rest has no incoming links and aren't clean targets, because "officials" tends to mean something more specific than the entire government.Jruderman (talk)03:19, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Jruderman. In sporting contexts, "officials" can also refer to referees/umpires/linesmen, etc and in Olympic contexts also seems to be sometimes used to refer to IOC members.Thryduulf (talk)10:33, 28 June 2025 (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).
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.
Keep I could be missing something, but neither article about the Stanley Cup riots mentions a ramming/car attack. There were cars that was burned in the 2011 riot, but that is more an attack on a car.Casablanca 🪨(T)14:59, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Casablanca Rock. All the relevant hits on google for"Vancouver ramming" -Wikipedia relate to the 2025 attack, restricting searches to pages indexed prior to the date of the attack finds nothing relevant.Thryduulf (talk)10:37, 28 June 2025 (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).
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 wasno consensus. No further response after a relist. There was no support for the Delete nomination, hence retargeting to Columbia#Arts_and_media_companies as a better target. Jay 💬14:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sony also owns the Columbia film company so there is no obvious target.Delete as this is too hyperspecific for a disambig pageKinopikotalk21:44, 17 June 2025 (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).
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 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).
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 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).
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.
Comment Ithinkthis comment from 2010 is suggesting the addition of a mention of Fchan to theImageboard article, however unlike other suggestions of that era it was not responded to. WikiBlame is just giving me gateway timeout errors so I can't check whether it has ever been mentioned there.Thryduulf (talk)20:59, 18 June 2025 (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).
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.
Delete It's too early to have a redirect like this. It's blatantly useless, and I suggest salting until a few months before the election. Keep in mindWP:TOOSOON also applies, per above.Freedoxm (talk·contribs)04:58, 29 June 2025 (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).
Relisted, seeWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Ulfcytel's land