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.
Delete - We can't have every typo as a redirect, only the most common or understandable. This one is clearly not a common of understandable typo. Cheers,✏️ C809 ⌨️ (let's chat)14:29, 11 March 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.
Leaning keep: While it is long, it's not inaccurate, and I'm not seeing anything particularly wrong with it. For what it's worth, the short description of the page contains the phrasing "animation studio and production company".Hey man im josh (talk)— Precedingundated comment added18:51, 10 March 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.
Adding a comma after the character name isn't necessarily making this a likely search variation. However, Rain is a character in the film.RanDom 404 (talk)15:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This would be in reference to:Rain was the first animated horse to receive an honorary registration certificate from the American Paint Horse Association (APHA). "Rain" being a common word, I can understand a redirect such asRain (character), and less likelyRain (horse), but the redirect under discussion is not a good title.Delete. The pre-BLAR content was unsourced, probably original text. Also, the redirect is mentioned atRain (disambiguation) in the "People" section and should be moved out from there, and we don't have an Animals or a non-people characters section. Jay 💬16:08, 17 March 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.
Delete as implausible search term. First of all, based on page history, it likely wouldn't qualify as G10. the intent wasn't to compare Mark Rubio to lubricant but a good faith attempt to add a "translated term used by Beijing". That being said, it definitely doesn't satisfyWP:RFOR by a longshot, and the transliteration isn't even correct (it should be lubiao— from either 卢比奥 or 鲁比奥 depending on the character used) —🪫Volatile 📲T |⌨️C03:55, 11 March 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 as harmless and unproblematic. A user is perfectly entitled to redirect their user page to their contributions, and doing so is nor promotional in the slightest. Redirects to special pages do not work, functioning as soft redirects, so there isn't even any chance of confusion.Thryduulf (talk)14:46, 10 March 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.
eh, i think this is more of a "restore and send to afd" case. admittedly, i'm not the biggest expert on the matter, but it seems that the most reliable sources in the pre-blar content (citations 2, 3, and 5) only actuallymight be reliable. unless someone who is more experienced in the south african cricket scene than me can opine here, in which case i'll uncritically believe their assertions :3consarn(prison phone)(crime record)15:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When I say "without prejudice to AfD" it's because I have no strong opinion on whether it should go to AfD or not and I'm not advocating for or against it being nominated.Thryduulf (talk)04:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yeah. hence my disagreement. if restored, i think it absolutely should go to afd unless someone could evaluate the sources here (because i'm still no expert on ball sport #701). then again, this was created and blanked early enough that just draftifying would be a better optionconsarn(prison phone)(crime record)10:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The 2026 season is not mentioned at the target, making it confusing / misleading for anybody who searches for the title and finds nothing of relevance there. But, as Thryduulf points out, this was previously an article. The fault lies with the person who redirected it to a location which had no information about it. I'm also leaning towards restoring the article.Hey man im josh (talk)15:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify it. Yes, it's too soon (which means that restoring it to mainspace is problematic)but the redirecting was also problematic due to there being no information on the 2026 edition at the target. Draftying it resolves both issues. --Tavix(talk)15:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The SA20 article now mentions the 2026, 2027 and 2028 seasons, all of which were created at the same time and redirected by me. I wasn't aware that they needed to be specifically mentioned. They are now. Up to y'all what you do with the non-articles that were createdBlue Square Thing (talk)16:25, 12 March 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, if by default. i can guess what the nom might be trying to say... but it's at best not a deletion rationale (or a rationale at all), and nana is mentioned in the target (i wonder why). maybe an argument could be made for her birth date being unmentioned at the moment, but my brain is allergic to remembering things related to k-pop, so i can't help muchconsarn(prison phone)(crime record)14:25, 10 March 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.
closed twice before with no consensus (first time,second time), with the recommendation of waiting at least 2 months to nom again. thus, to celebrate the 69rd day of the year(nice), it's time to nom again. with that preamble aside... that's a word with seemingly no fitting enough target and not much to work with for a dab, though an argument could be made for this resident incel being the primary topic. what do?consarn(prison phone)(crime record)12:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
notes:
tighten (character) is a redirect that exists, but it likely doesn't matter since it has that juicy disambiguator
yes, it's tighten. megamind tried to name him titan, but he's canonically a dumb stupid bad at writing doofus who thinks the triangle doesn't go in the square hole, so the discussion about whether or not that is his funny name is at best an irrelevant misconception
Delete Redirecting a dictionary word to the misspelling of a film character's name is downright wrong and astonishing.* Pppery *it has begun... 00:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
again, it's not a misspelling of a character's name, it's a mishearing, which is itself canon because hal is the kind of person who thinks the possessive form of "it" has an apostrophe
Disagree that there is no fitting enough target. If that was the case we wouldn't haveTighten (character) redirecting to the same target. If someone was looking for the dictionary meaning of the word, Wikipedia is not the place. The hatnote at the current target (added after the previous RfD) is also quite silly, but should alleviate any "confusion". Jay 💬20:22, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Was extensively discussed at the previous RFDs and nothing has changed. It's one of the official names of the main villainous character, there's nothing called "Tighten" at the DAB, we should not soft retarget to Wiktionary when we have encyclopedic coverage here, and now there's a hatnote for those who might be confused. --Patar knight -chat/contributions02:03, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:Tight is a DAB page and doesn't seem like the best target. Tightening doesn't exist. There is a character named Tighten that we have some content about, so might as well.Schützenpanzer(Talk)01:22, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete since I'm a bit tired of this being renominated, but I really don't want this to be closed to "keep" per my comment in one of the previous discussions. Let's leave this as "no consensus" and move on...Steel1943 (talk)03:14, 5 April 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.
Support - The only reason the redirect exists is because someone created the article like that and I moved it to its proper title.Llammakey (talk)11:20, 10 March 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.
This seems like an inappropiate attempt at aWP:PNS that didn't go far. Internal links range from 4-3 (forMP:) all the way to0 (forMP:DYK), so it's not like any links will break from deleting these redirects.
Keep all. The MP: prefix is mentioned inWP:SC#Pseudo-namespaces as an explicitly allowed case. People in the previous RfD said they find these redirects useful and all of them still get views so there are some editors that still do. And finally, there are some links that don't show up inSpecial:WhatLinksHere such as links in edit summaries. We can't know for certain whether deleting will break any links or not.Nickps (talk)23:57, 10 March 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).
Relisted, seeWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 17#Kilgore (Smudge)