Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 6[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 6, 2022.

Palladium Cinema, Arvika[edit]

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. Jay 💬 03:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in page. "Filmhuset Palladium" exists but does not seem like an important enough feature of the town to merit a redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 22:36, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Klappar Haj[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 13#Klappar Haj

Esoteric Runology[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 14#Esoteric Runology

Secular Order of Druids[edit]

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 for want of a suitable target. The previously-merged content consists only of citation templates, which, as purely factual metadata about published works, are below the threshold of originality. So no history needs to be preserved. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy nomination for 217.20.247.226 who WP:PROD'd this redirect with the rationale: "The SODs are not part of COBDO and do not fulfil notability" TartarTorte 15:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving this to the correct place. COBDO and the SODs are part of Tim Sebastion's legacy. Tim died in 2007, by which time OBOD. BDO et al. had left COBDO. His replacement as Chosen Chief of SOD is Wally Dean (Travis?). Since that point SOD have not been involved with COBDO either and the latter has become a shell (MO). SOD does still exist (as of date-stamp), but afaik has no formal membership, which puts it in a similar category (local group) to those listed here https://druidnetwork.org/resources/groups-groves/. As Ronald Hutton has attended COBDO meetings in the past and is aware of SOD, his work would be a good gauge of notability and reference. As I know / knew all these people personally I'm not in a position to write an entry for SOD and I think the best solution would be to remove the link on grounds of notability as this is dead wood IMO - an unlinked mention of SOD in a biography of Tim Sebastion would be an improvement. Please advise if there is any further action I could reasonably take - my knowledge of Druidry in the UK is extensive and I'd be happy to help keep Wikipedia up to date, however I am cautious around introducing any OR or PO. Druidry in the UK is particularly subject to Pythonesque politics. Tim flatus (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't currently have a copy of Hutton, Ronald (2009). Blood and Mistletoe: The History of the Druids in Britain. Yale University Press (London). ISBN 978-0-300-14485-7. but if it isn't in there it "didn't happen". Tim flatus (talk) 17:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Clyde!Franklin! 18:52, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim flatus: Based on an e-copy I accessed, Hutton's book only mentions either Sebastion or his organization in the acknowledgements. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:18, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: couple of references were merged (when it was an article) to the target as part of the second AfD with summary rescuing material from Secular Order of Druids, an article scheduled for deletion and is available at the target's page history. Also, an article on Tim Sebastion is not available, nor was attempted to be created (could not find any deleted pages or drafts). Jay 💬 03:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The suggestion to redirect to CoBOD was made by a now blocked sockpuppet account. Tim flatus (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Tim flatus, given Presidentman's verification attempt. signed, Rosguill talk 21:30, 17 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Manhattan (film)[edit]

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 Manhattan (disambiguation)#Film and television. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous; see Manhattan (1924 film). See also WP:PRIMARYFILM. Retarget to Manhattan (disambiguation)#Film and television. 162 etc. (talk) 18:21, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

CC BY NC[edit]

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. There is clear consensus, and this is quite uncontroversial. (non-admin closure) --Matr1x-101 {user page - talk with me :) - contribs!} 12:17, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be retargeted to Creative Commons NonCommercial license because it is a more specific term. {userpage! | talk!} 18:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:10, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support refining pretty obvious that the retarget provides more info and is more specific. RoostTC(please ping me when replying) 02:10, 7 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Sweet Babboo[edit]

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 Linus Van Pelt#Crushes and admirers. Jay 💬 02:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pet name the target calls her crush in the comic strips; not mentioned in page. Rusalkii (talk) 17:34, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete seems to be an obscure in-universe term --Lenticel (talk) 01:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not that obscure; the term is used in the title of several books (1997's Happy Valentine's Day, Sweet Babboo, 2002's My Sweet Babboo: Peanuts On Love, 2017's Be My Valentine Sweet Babboo, 2018's I'm Not Your Sweet Babboo! and next year's Blockheads, Beagles, and Sweet Babboos: New Perspectives on Charles M. Schulz's Peanuts) I would recommend instead including it in the article, as it is a key part of the Sally/Linus relationship, but I have a heavy Peanuts WP:COI and will not be adding it myself. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:58, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no mention in article RoostTC(please ping me when replying) 02:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unclear without mention: Yes, it is Sally Brown that states this phrase, but when the phrase is said, it refers to Linus Van Pelt. Steel1943 (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Weak Retarget to Linus Van Pelt#Crushes and admirers as mentioned there, but as "sweet baboo" (one less "b" than the nominated redirects. meaning the nominated redirects are probably misspellings.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed the "weak" after I searched on some third-party search engines and discovered that the article Linus Van Pelt had "Babboo" spelled wrong ("Baboo" instead of "Babboo") per its in-universe spelling, thus I fixed it. Wikipedia has an article titled Sweet Baboo (2 "b"s) that's about a Welsh musician, whereas the version with 3 "b"s, "Babboo", apparently exclusively refers to Linus Van Pelt. Steel1943 (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Seconding retarget as nom, I didn't find that page. Rusalkii (talk) 23:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Linus Van Pelt#Crushes and admirers per above. CycloneYoris talk! 23:51, 13 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Astros's combined World Series no-hitter[edit]

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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect should be deleted because it is a highly unlikely search term due to "Astros's" being gramatically incorrect. This page was previously deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astros's combined World Series no-hitter in November 2022, and a redirect was subsequently created despite this delete close. Frank Anchor 15:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The only thing most people seemed to agree on in that AFD is that the page name wasn't a good redirect target, and MOS:PLURALNOUN suggests that was correct. Hatman31 (talk) 16:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep: It seems that "Astros's" is a pretty commonly used term despite being incorrect. It seems relatively harmless as a redirect, despite not being notable enough for an article. TartarTorte 18:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no evidence to suggest "Astros's" is a commonly used term despite your baseless claim. Plus WP:ITSHARMLESS is not a valid reason to keep. Frank Anchor 18:16, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually every single hit on the above search is a Wiki-mirror whose only mention of the "Astros's" combined no hitter is a refence to the title in a template. And even if that wasn't the casae, 17 is a very small number. Frank Anchor 13:31, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree it's a small number, I was just throwing it in here to make the conversation more concrete. Thank you for checking that the hits are also wikimirrors. Rusalkii (talk) 17:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, thanks for clarifying. Frank Anchor 19:15, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and the AfD discussion. This redirect was recreated against consensus which was established at AfD, specifically per the closing rationale. So, deletion is completely warranted in this case. CycloneYoris talk! 23:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment: this redirect shows up as linked from hundreds of articles and several templates, but I could not figure out where and how exactly. Jay 💬 02:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably because it's linked in Template:MLB on ESPN Radio, right? I don't think it would be much of an issue to fix that link if this redirect is deleted. Hatman31 (talk) 02:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I piped it there and the incoming article links has now come down to 12. No wonder this got recreated as a redirect with the exact same spelling - it would have been showing as a redlink in several pages. Courtesy ping Legoktm, closer of the AfD. Jay 💬 02:59, 14 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Teliomycotina[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 14#Teliomycotina

Ibrahim[edit]

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 Ibrahim (disambiguation). – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Ibrahim (disambiguation). No reason to assume that the current target is more likely than any possible other. An anonymous username, not my real name 11:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly did, but was removed (by MB) a few hours after the redirect's target was changed. CycloneYoris talk! 01:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to dab. This is English Wikipedia; I do not find it likely that "Ibrahim" would be used to describe Abraham in general, since we usually call him just Abraham in a general context. This makes retargeting back to Abraham not ideal; people might be more familiar with "Ibrahim" as a given name, even. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are multiple retarget suggestions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:40, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to dab, I would be surprised by Ibrahim bare going to Abraham, my first association is in fact the name and I would expect an English-language discussion of Abraham in Islam to usually call him Abraham, as our article does. A quick google search gives about 25/75 on the name vs the prophet on the first page, if you ignore our own article. Rusalkii (talk) 21:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with this. Ibrahim is not a common name for Abraham. It should go to the disambuatgion page. RoostTC(please ping me when replying) 02:01, 7 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Clothesline (magazine)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 14#Clothesline (magazine)

Tara Vs Bilal[edit]

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 John Abraham filmography. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target. Not clear what the purpose of this may be. MB 05:29, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per retargeting proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Clyde!Franklin! 09:43, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bela River[edit]

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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should "Bela River" continue be treated as synonymous with Belá (river), or is there any need to disambiguate between the latter and River Bela in a way that the internal redirect Bela River (disambiguation) is meaningful?

We are here because Bela River (disambiguation) hasn't been deleted in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 21#Bela River (disambiguation). Personally I think that this process has been a gigantic bureaucratic waste of time, but I don't really have the energy to swim against the tide, so I'm just continuing to play along. If you're reading this, thank you for your continued patience :D --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, the status quo will allow someone to find the river they're looking for with minimal effort - the problem is that the current dab redirect fails WP:SURPRISE. Tevildo (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are no actual rivers listed at Bela Reka, that's just off topic. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Tevildo meant the See also entries. Jay 💬 10:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Tevildo's solution. Although my final comments at the other RfD was to have the dab at the lowercased river title, I'm good with Tevildo's too. Just so that we understand that River Bela and Bela River will have differring content. Jay 💬 10:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The bureaucratic problem only happened because of a pre-mature close of the previous RfD, and subsequent AfD which had a procedural close. I usually don't see this happening, so this is an exception. Jay 💬 10:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further input and to solidify consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:53, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate per Tevildo. I'm not sure if this is the best solution, but seems to be an improvement over the status quo. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:23, 8 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bloon[edit]

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! 11:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have a hard time seeing how a non-existent spacecraft is overwhelmingly the primary topic over the video game enemy that has been continuously and notably fought for 15 years and counting. The game franchise based on the enemy has been consistently with a usage edge for a while as well. Either disambiguate between the spacecraft and Bloons or just retarget to Bloons if the enemy is primary enough. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:18, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to the franchise or disambiguate, per nom. Personally I prefer the retarget, but that might be the childhood nostalgia talking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusalkii (talk • contribs) 08:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the primary topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:12, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DABify - The primary topic would be the franchise if it was spelled correctly but it isn't. They both have same importance. RoostTC(please ping me when replying) 02:06, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:07, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dab drafted under the nomination template. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:25, 8 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Freedom Ride[edit]

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 no consensus. I was about to retarget this to Freedom Riders (disambiguation) per WP:NCRET. However, since there was some opposition against this suggestion, mostly due to the lack of a primary topic, then I guess that preserving the status quo seems best for now. Without prejudice to renominating if anyone wants to. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest making this into a DAB to cater for Freedom Riders as well as Freedom Ride (Australia) (and there may be others). As it stands, it has incorrect incoming links, and it is likely to be targeted in the same way in the future. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 10:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to direct the redirect 'Freedom Ride' to a dab page (but not 'Freedom Riders' which is the common name for the U.S. riders as well as the name of the events' article). I've redirected the appropriate entries to the 'Freedom Riders' page. Yes, the dab page should include a link to the Freedom Riders page, and to the Journey of Reconciliation page as well. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:38, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, Randy Kryn. There's Freedom Ride (album) too, a couple of possible See alsos for the DAB too. I can do that tomorrow if not done before. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 13:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome, and thank you for your inititive here. Other pages, such as the Freedom Riders National Monument, the Freedom Rides Museum, etc. could also be included on a dab page as 'Related' to the topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did not realise that there iwas a Freedom Riders DAB page, but (especially now that all incoming links have been replaced), it makes more sense to redirect Freedom Ride to that DAB page. It actually says Freedom Rider is the primary topic, not Freedom Ride, and the intro sentence says "Freedom Rider or Freedom Ride also may refer to:"... The Freedom Ride in Australia was an important historical event and more commonly known than the US term. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are still a pile of Wikipedia articles that use Freedom Ride with respect to the US version: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=Freedom+Ride&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1 This may outnumber the Australian version. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate or Retarget to the existing Rider disambiguation page or Keep the US term as the primary?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 04:32, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Bag of douches[edit]

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. Jay 💬 04:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a nonexistent phrase apparently added as a joke. An anonymous username, not my real name 04:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, not an alternate name for topic. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, 3,200 google hits and after our own article the second is urban dictionary, and then it quickly trails off into random social media posts. Seems like a turn of phrase some people have independently converged on, but not a set phrase. Rusalkii (talk) 21:21, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete joke redirect --Lenticel (talk) 01:46, 7 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Operation Mud Hen[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 13#Operation Mud Hen

I.Q. test results[edit]

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 Intelligence quotient. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as this is an unlikely search term and the wording could cause confusion. An anonymous username, not my real name 02:24, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Black Irish[edit]

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 Black Irish (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some disagreement over the best target, so taking this here. Current target is a buried in Irish people while the other potential target is Black people in Ireland. Recommend the latter, which has a hatnote to the former. MB 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Multiple target suggestions. Note that the nomination statement may seem confusing as it was probably written when the target was Irish people#TermBlackIrish and there was an edit war on. Hence one of the proposed targets is actually the current target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:19, 6 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Zimbabzwe[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 17#Zimbabzwe

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_6&oldid=1128246856"