Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 5

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

February 5

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 5, 2022.

Bb bullets & Bb pellets

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 13#Bb bullets & Bb pellets

Big Congo

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) Heanor (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

delete, no mention in the target article. Can be offensive for people from the Republic of the Congo Heanor (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep It's a bit harder to find usages of this name, apparently because "big Congo [X]" is unexpectedly common, but the United States Joint Publications Research Service book source below at Little Congo's RfD mentions it opposite of Little Congo. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a plausible search term. I see some usage (e.g. here), and it is very plausible that a reader might know which Congo they're interested in but not remember whether it's called the "Republic" or the "Democratic Republic". —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:33, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per both above. Thryduulf (talk) 16:51, 6 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.

Little Congo

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) Heanor (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

delete, no mention in the target article. Can be offensive. Heanor (talk) 21:14, 5 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.

David Ayers

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. While there was no consensus for what to do for the redirect, there was consensus to disambiguate David Ayres which is now available at
WP:RM. Jay (talk) 17:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Page was initially at this title but was moved because "That's how it's spelled on gravestone." However, ice hockey goalie David Ayres is currently the primary topic for that spelling. Given "Ayers" does not appear to be the correct spelling, either this should be redirected to the hockey guy or the medal of honor guy should be the primary topic. Smartyllama (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest "(Medal of Honor)" after the name in the article title? And leave the hockey player as the primary? Boo Boo (talk) 15:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 20:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move
    David Ayres (ice hockey). In a nod to pagemover Hhfjbaker, this would demonstrate that the soldier has equal or better claim to the primary usage of David Ayres. Havradim leaf a message 21:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Sound good to me. Thanks and cheers! Boo Boo (talk) 20:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If this is approved, then per
    David Ayers on the dab page, calling him David Ayres, or otherwise use David Ayres (soldier) as a redirect (I'm not sure which procedure is correct). Havradim leaf a message 07:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:08, 5 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.

ʻAʻā

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) CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

The uppercase-starting name refers to the star Sirius and should be targeted there. See the discussion and sources at the 'A RfD. The equivalent lowercase-starting name correctly points to lava, and should be retained ('a'a - ʻaʻa - `a`a - 'a'ā - ʻaʻā).

Also, if all of these variations do not make sense, keep the proper one pointing to the right target, and delete the rest. Jay (talk) 20:17, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment All of these look like very plausible substitutions for the ʻOkina so they should not be deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • These redirects represent one of the several Hawaiian names for Sirius. It is not mentioned in the article about the star (even though there's brief coverage of its role in Hawaiian culture), and I'm not sure there's any scope for changing that. On the other hand, targeting the lava section is perfectly appropriate: in this meaning, the terms are actually used in English. I don't think the distinction between upper and lower case initials is very relevant: the wiki software treats these two as equivalent, and it's only because of the fluke of the ʻokina that this isn't happening here and that we're in a position to be able to have separate redirects for the two case variants. – Uanfala (talk) 13:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:07, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. For exactly the reasons User:Uanfala said, the difference in capitalization is unlikely to be salient to readers searching for the type of lava. The type of lava is definitely the primary topic for this term, and the hatnote at the target article is sufficient for helping readers who are looking for the star. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:38, 6 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.

Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Template:Largest Israeli cities

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 15#Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Template:Largest Israeli cities

Over expression

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 15#Over expression

Crime and Outrage Bill (Ireland) 1850

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 19:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo, not eligible for speedy as not recently created. DuncanHill (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I can't see any clear reference to Crime and Outrage Bill (Ireland) 1850 in any official sources. I can see a reference to a UK House of Commons debate in 1852 titled Crime and Outrage (Ireland) Bill, along with some more around that time here, but briefly reading it doesn't appear to be another name for the bill that was passed and might've just been a working title or a mistake made when Hansard was digitised. --Bonoahx (talk) 21:17, 5 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.

Sadhbh O’Neill (politician)

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
(non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 17:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

This page was created just after a AfD, seen here: Talk:Sadhbh O'Neill. While it was changed to a redirect, given that it was only ever created to counteract an AfD after consensus, there's no benefit to this separate page continuing on Wikipedia, even merely as redirect. It's also a misnomer, as she hasn't been a politician for many years. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Recreation of the article at a new page name was clearly inappropriate, but creation of a redirect at this title would have been fine, hence the
WP:BLAR instead of speedy deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:46, 6 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.

Google go

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
(non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 16:47, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

This also same as Google Go, seems like Google go is a search engine/an app, not programming language Vitaium (talk) 13:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Google Go (disambiguation), which I've just created. Thanks for pointing out the further confusion Google has created in their product namespace, Vitaium! I hadn't heard of the app until now. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 15:16, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • For reference, the uppercased RfD is at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 2#Google Go. Jay (talk) 16:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Jonathan Deamer. Should be noted that Go isn't a proprietary language owned by Google, so Google Go would not be a common way of describing it like Angular isn't called Google Angular. --Bonoahx (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bonoahx - We've both suggested to retarget, but I'd nonetheless add to your point: while it's possibly not a common name for the language, I can see Google Go being a common search term for people looking for information on "Golang" distinct from the Go! programming language, which supports the idea of retargeting to the disambiguation age. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Jonathan Deamer That's fair, seems like a strong argument to proceed with the retarget and leave Go! as a hatnote. --Bonoahx (talk) 18:33, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Google Go (disambiguation) where it is discussed. I've also changed my vote in the other RfD to retarget.--Lenticel (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move
    WP:MALPLACED disambiguation page, then point this redirect at it. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 22:19, 9 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.

White Coat Pattern

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 Cat coat genetics#White spotting and epistatic white. signed, Rosguill talk 19:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Target section does not exist. Also, it is unclear what this redirect is meant to refer to. The term is not mentioned in the target article. Its previous target,

Deaf white cat, doesn't seem to identify this term as precisely as it's worded. Not sure if the most generic retargeting option, White coat, is a helpful option. Steel1943 (talk) 20:12, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:33, 5 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.

White spotting gene

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. signed, Rosguill talk 19:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems this term is ambiguous, but not sure about a disambiguation page; seems this term could also refer to Lethal white syndrome, which is about cows. Steel1943 (talk) 20:07, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:33, 5 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.

Liberation (Intro)

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. signed, Rosguill talk 19:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot determine why this redirects here, but it is an odd disambiguator, and may be ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: The first track is often written as "Liberation (Intro)". This can be proven with a quick Google search. It used to be written so on this article as well, hence why I created the redirect, as I did so for all other tracks on the album at the time. Ss112 18:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Shhhnotsoloud: if the explanation is satisfactory, do you want to withdraw the nomination? Jay (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jay: I'd like it to run its course. Discogs, Allmusic and Spotify do not list it as (Intro), and without a mention in the article this redirect may be ambiguous and confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:03, 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! 10:32, 5 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.

International Roma Conference

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 deleted by
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:32, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Another case of

WP:R#DELETE #10. signed, Rosguill talk 19:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:32, 5 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.

Your margin is my opportunity

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 13:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't appear to be a plausible redirect, but I'm not sure. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 10:26, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - it is a quote attributed to Bezos, relating to his business strategy when founding Amazon, but doesn't seem particularly useful as a redirect and isn't cited in History of Amazon or somewhere like that. This isn't Wikiquote. --Bonoahx (talk) 12:11, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per User:Bonoahx. This quote doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia, so there's no suitable target. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:40, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per User:Bonoahx. Veverve (talk) 21:47, 6 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.

Template:Usuario retirado

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 13:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary cross-language template redirect, we generally don't keep redirects in other languages in template-space.

(noting for transparency that this was created as a direct transclusion of {{retired}}, I've updated this to be a redirect as it functionally was before and discussing at RfD therefore makes more sense than TfD) Elli (talk | contribs) 10:03, 5 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.

Law of maximum entropy production

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 13:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert in this subject, but the target does not mention "Maximum entropy" or "Law of maximum entropy production". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:09, 5 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.

Potatoe

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
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:53, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

This redirect pointed to

WP:BOLD edit without discussion). I think a discussion here might be appropriate. Beefaloe (formerly SpursySituation) (talk) 08:34, 5 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.

User:RumenAhmedRazu

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 speedy delete per
WP:U2, nonexistent user - Eureka Lott 15:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Editor had attempted to rename themself by moving user page: this redirect is left over after the page was moved back. PamD 08:10, 5 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.

User:Dronebogus/Userboxes/Userbox Name

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 speedy delete per
WP:U1, user request. - Eureka Lott 15:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

I need this deleted as its preventing me from properly using the userbox maker nevermind, I realized what I was doing wrong, but this is still useless and can be deleted. Dronebogus (talk) 08:02, 5 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.

Battle of Falling Waters

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 Battle of Williamsport. signed, Rosguill talk 19:01, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest retargeting to

WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. Current what links here is a mix of both potential targets, so the links will need to be sorted through regardless of how this RFD closes. Hog Farm Talk 21:15, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 05:32, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom, and update hatnotes and article leads as appropriate. FWIW, Google searching certainly supports the 1863 battle as being the primary topic. I would also suggest the creation of
    Falling Waters. It appears the 1863 battle in particular is sometimes just referred to as "Falling Waters" (common for "Battle of" to be omitted from many battle names). Then add a hatnote to the dab page at the WV article. Also, I am happy to help fix the back links once this RfD is resolved, just ping me. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I created the dab page (now a blue link above). Mdewman6 (talk) 01:16, 10 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.

Clouded tiger

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. There are sources supporting the use of the term for between two and four different animals, apparently without any being a primary topic.
(non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 20:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. From what I can work out, I think this is a synonym of Clouded leopard but I'm not certain (it might instead be a Marbled cat. It's not mentioned on either of those pages though. I'll drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cats. Thryduulf (talk) 22:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Seems it has been used for both the clouded leopard (e.g. britannica.com) and the marbled cat (e.g. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary via thefreedictionary.com). The latter also gives tortoise-shell tiger as an alternative name for the marbled cat. There's a nice 19th century illustration that looks like a clouded leopard. I don't think it is in common use for either, though, so it's a question which one is rarer than the other if making a choice of most common use. A disambiguation page is probably best. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)but[reply]
  • Comment. At the time the redirect was made, the article did mention 'clouded tiger'. But, if it was removed since then, I guess the mention was inaccurate. Gil Gamesh (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It was removed in 2009 (the redirect was created in 2006) by Wikiuser100 with the edit summary "uncited". I've just seen that Calico cat does mention this as an alternative name, but that is also uncited (the citation only verifies the following sentence). The term is mentioned at [1], [2] and [3] but I've not checked the reliability or independence of those sources. Thryduulf (talk) 22:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig between Calico cat, Clouded leopard, Marbled cat and (maybe) Tortoiseshell cat. Based on the comments above it seems that this term is/has been used to refer to all of these types of cat. Thryduulf (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A disambig draft will help. Although note that there is no mention of clouded or tiger at Marbled cat and Tortoiseshell cat, and no mention of tiger at Clouded leopard.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 05:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: DAB page created at
    talk) 14:10, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Disambiguate --Thesmp (talk) 09:17, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per
    Bison X's plan above, though most of the entries have been removed as unmentioned in the target articles - should be rectified. eviolite (talk) 18:46, 22 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.

F.U.B.A.

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 (talk) 06:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target or anywhere else; relationship to target unknown. Delete unless there is justification. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:00, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Enwiki has nothing about this initialism and Fuba which redirects to Fubá is not a suitable target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. F.U.P.A. (with a P) is a slang term for panniculus, but I can't find any instances of F.U.B.A. being used in the same way. Retargeting to Fubá doesn't really make sense, none of the articles listed there (all people with the last name Fubá) are plausibly spelled as "F.U.B.A.". Beefaloe (formerly SpursySituation) (talk) 12:36, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as confusing. I found several organizations that has this acronym but they don't have wiki articles yet. I also considered retarget to FUBAR but it is a partial title match at best. --Lenticel (talk) 11:30, 6 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.

Biochemical Systematics & Ecology (Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

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 request. Jay (talk) 05:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this awkward name. This is a misnomer. We use Amsterdam, Netherlands and we should not add for every publication also a redirect with a location dab. Especially not scientific journals with a global reach. Same problem at Biochemical Systematics and Ecology (Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Proposing both for deletion. Nothing links to these either. No added value. Only wasted. These redirects have been around less than a year! gidonb (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural, not properly tagged for deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Coninciding with the procedural relist, I have formally added the related redirect, since the nom proposes both be deleted. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:55, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for these spans, Mdewman6! gidonb (talk) 15:26, 6 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.

Bicolor coat pattern

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 12#Bicolor coat pattern

Sagging belly

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
(non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 03:19, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Not mentioned in the target article, and not exclusive to cats. Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:08, 5 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_5&oldid=1074356345"