Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 17

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

March 17

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 17, 2025.

Empire of Death (Doctor Who)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 8#Empire of Death (Doctor Who)

Kilgore (Smudge)

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. ✗plicit 03:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this redirect makes no sense. the band was called, at various points, either "Kilgore", "Smudge", or "Kilgore Smudge", but never "Kilgore (Smudge)" -- FMSky (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:53, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

WLBJ (defunct)

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 WLBJ. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 12:37, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This disambiguator may itself be ambigous;

WLBJ-LP is also defunct. (This is a large part of why "defunct" is no longer used as a disambiguator for broadcast station articles.) This may need to be retargeted to WLBJ as an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

For what it's worth, WLBJ-LP has been nominated for deletion; if that article is deleted, that might eliminate the need for the WLBJ disambiguation page and render this RfD all but moot. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The AFD closed as redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to the disambiguation page. This is the former article title, which makes it a plausible search term, but ambiguous. When we have plausible but ambiguous search terms we disambiguate because that is significantly more helpful to readers than deletion. I see no reason why deletion would be preferable here. Thryduulf (talk) 23:27, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Plant🌱man (talk) 23:40, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Cinderella III: The Reverse of Time

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 26#Cinderella III: The Reverse of Time

Disney's "Teacher's Pet"

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) Cremastra talk 17:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Why does this has quotation marks around it? RanDom 404 (talk) 21:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is indicating that "Teacher's Pet" is the title of a work by Disney and not a person who is teacher's pet to someone named Disney. Thryduulf (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. This redirect is harmless, unambiguous, and potentially helpful—the quotation marks don't really hurt anything here, and the target is exactly what the redirect promises. Regards, SONIC678 03:03, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Chiming in to point out that this looks similar to a lot of RFDs that get deleted for being
WP:UNNATURAL
:
Titles with punctuation, obscure errors, additions, or removals that have no specific affinity to one title over any other: e.g. being in quotations.
I think the difference is that titles for TV shows are often put in quotes to indicate that they are titles, and so it is reasonable to anticipate someone typing this title this way, Wikipedia page title conventions notwithstanding. I don't feel strongly about this, just hoping to help the nominator and commentators understand each other's rationale. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 02:10, 27 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Suada Dilbreovic

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. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 11:04, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bot-generated sibling to Suada Dilbreović Joy (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete when I googled "Suada Dilbreovic", I only came up with two results: the aforementioned redirect and this (apparently a glossary; the page did not load for me). Seems to me that it's not a common misspelling. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:00, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dreamy Jazz do you mind getting rid of this one, after you deleted the one below? No point keeping this loose end. --Joy (talk) 14:12, 30 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Suada Dilbreović

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. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 12:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover from a typo fix from 2006. Seems way too intricate to be a common typo. Joy (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete same as #Suada Dilbreovic. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this and #Suada Dilbreovic should be merged as one RfD. What do you say, Joy? Plant🌱man (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course, I just did it this way because of the tooling, the're obviously linked. --Joy (talk) 03:05, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Joy I have found User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD very helpful for cases like this. Rusalkii (talk) 17:55, 18 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

2024 Justice Department Resignations

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:CSD#G7. Thryduulf (talk) 18:29, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Misleading - no one resigned in 2024, this started Feb 2025. Rusalkii (talk) 20:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not helpful in any way. Just like 2023 Justice Department Resignations, 2022 Justice Department Resignations etc. which don't exist for that reason. Plant🌱man (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I made it in error. Please delete. Remember (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Rusalkii Should this be tagged with {{db-g7}}? Plant🌱man (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an expert in speedy deletion criteria, but it does seem to match. Rusalkii (talk) 17:52, 18 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

3D SRAM

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 31#3D SRAM

Wikipedia:Hate is wrong

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. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 12:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IMO this redirect is actively disruptive purely by its existence, as the fact that it exists implies that Wikipedia censors editors by virtue of the opinions they hold. As the personal essay (not policy or guideline page) to which it redirects—

Iridescent 18:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

More broadly though, we already do have to answer questions of right and wrong here. One of the major policy justifications for
WP:NOTCENSORED
is that we think that censorship is wrong. The whole reason we're here is that we think a free online encyclopedia is a good thing to make.
Basically: whether or not this was Tamzin's explicit intent, part of the core point of
WP:HID is also that hate is wrong. In fact part of the point of us saying that any behavior is disruptive is that it's wrong, since we're all here to make an encyclopedia and think that's a good thing to do. Loki (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
If you want to write an essay about how hate is wrong, feel free to write it. HID, however, is not that essay. It is a related but very much distinct point. --
they|xe|🤷) 01:06, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
I respect that you believe that but you do not own this essay. Loki (talk) 02:09, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying I own the essay. I do think I've probably read through the whole thing more times than anyone else in the world, and there is not a word in it commenting on the morality of hate. Whether a redirect will be misleading is usually a mainspace question, but it applies in all namespaces. Here, someone following a redirect titled "Hate is wrong" will be confused to find themselves on an essay that does not say, at any point, that hate is wrong, but rather says things like Under this essay, bigoted editors are not sanctioned for their ideologies; they are sanctioned for their behavior, Focusing on ideology, in justifying sanctions, raises many difficult-to-answer questions, needlessly complicates things, and leads to drama, bigots can edit here ... if they edit without engaging in any hate speech or hateful conduct, and again, Wikipedia policy does not concern itself with people's private views.
Again, if you want to write an essay about hate being wrong in the context of Wikipedia, that's fine! But this is not an essay that makes that argument, and therefore it is misleading to redirect that phrase to it. --
they|xe|🤷) 02:40, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
Also, if you think HID is a more generalized version of NONAZIS and NORACISTS, you fundamentally misunderstand it. HID is, explicitly, from its outset, a concurrence-in-part and dissent-in-part to those essays, and has an entire section on this distinction. (NOCONFED and NOQUEERPHOBES postdate HID, but the same logic applies.) --
they|xe|🤷) 02:45, 18 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Geek fraternities

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 23:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling of "Greek" as in "Greek fraternity

Greek fraternity" which may be considered a non-neutral term. In addition, the singular version of this redirect, Geek fraternity, does not exist and has never existed. Steel1943 (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete unlikely search term. Plant🌱man (talk) 20:28, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

"Frat(ernity) boy/bro/brother/guy(s)" redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 7#"Frat(ernity) boy/bro/brother/guy(s)" redirects

TPOT

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 Jason H. Moore. Jay 💬 18:16, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An anonymous IP erroneously changed the acronym of the Pennsylvania Opera Theater (POT) to TPOT in this edit. This minor but incorrect change went unnoticed and the redirect was created in error. 4meter4 (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reason to delete. We're not responsible for non-notable meanings of a term. Otherwise, we'd have to delete most {{r from initialism}}s. Paradoctor (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that follows - "we delete all initialisms where the overwhelming primary topic doesn't have an article, such that redirecting to our best article for it would surprise most readers" strikes me as a totally reasonable policy and I suspect doesn't actually get most of the current redirects. (Of the first five random initialism redirects I checked, four had the target as the clearly primary topic and one didn't seem to have a primary topic). Rusalkii (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Primary topics are notable, by definition, and they have an article, by definition: the topic to which the term should lead. I was talking about non-notable meanings. BFDI is not notable. That's why
BFDI exists, but redirects to a German federal agency most likely not searched for by users entering "BFDI" into the search box. Or do you feel like nominating that one for deletion, too? Paradoctor (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
I do not feel like nominating that one for deletion because I'm pretty sure I just saw that discussion and I am not in the habit of re-litigating lost battles. My primary point was that in fact the case where the non-Wikipedia-notable meaning of the term is the primary topic (not as a term of art, but just as "what do most people seem to be looking for") are not anywhere near common enough that, if this was adopted as a principle at RfD, we'd need to delete most of them. Rusalkii (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to
nor should we) this seems like the best target for now. 65.181.23.139 (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: After discounting the vote of the blocked IP (although he was blocked prior to the previous relist), this discussion can do with some more opinion on the latest suggested target, or any further information on the possible alternative acronym of the current target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:21, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Orbiter

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. The nomination was to retarget to Satellite, and there were opinions for and against it. The discussion moved on to targeting Orbit, however there was no consensus for that as well. Multiple participants thought the current target of Spacecraft was sufficient. Jay 💬 06:05, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the course of an old (merge) discussion it was determined to redirect it to spaceship. I am bringing in the alternative of redirecting it to satellite, since orbiters are a type of mobile satellite. I think this is much better fitting, but I was asked to post here because of the old discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orbiter (2nd nomination)). Satellite was back then not discussed. Nsae Comp (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, an orbiter is a satellite, but I would keep the redirect to spacecraft, because the term "satellite," in the context of artificial satellites, usually refers to satellites in orbit around Earth, not other planets. T g7 (talk) 22:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I understand the term orbiter: an orbiter is a moveable satellite, including around Earth, afterall the spaceplane of the Space Shuttle system was called orbiter. Of course if I turn my argument around, then a satellite is a more or less unmoveable spacecraft and therefore is less than an orbiter. But about every other satellite has some altitude correction capability, so not really unmoveable. Since I get the argument for spaceship, I am thinking now of redirecting it to something else: how about to
orbital insertion
? It has a part about orbiter already. All in all orbiter is kind of every spaceship other than sub-orbital spaceship or interstellar spaceship. Both of which are not neglectable examples of spaceships and thus spaceships cant be equated with orbiter, orbiters being particular types. If the space shuttle was an orbiter and many spaceprobes are, than maybe its not the ability to stay and adjust orbits, but the ability to travel from Earth to an (extraterrestrial) orbit, as with the space shuttle and many probes likewise, and not so much the orbital insertion it self. .. so maybe spaceship after all? Hmmmm...
Just as a mind map:
Launch system
Lower stage
Sub-obrital spacecraft
Satellite
Upper stage
Interplanetary/lunar spacecraft (incl. impactor etc.)
Third stage
Orbiter
Fourth stage
...
This would categorize an orbiter even more mobile than a interplanetary/lunar spacecraft, which is always powerful enough to become at least a satellite or solar orbiter. So thinking of the space shuttle, orbiter is the added characteristic of a (interplanetary) spacecraft to be the orbital insertion STAGE, not just perform orbital insertion, like the space shuttle is as well. But that said, maybe bot all extraterrestrial orbiters performed the insertion.
So I am back at satellite, just a term used for traveling satellite.
Or as in the original merge discussion proposed as the target for the merger, but now insted rather as thw target for the redirect: to the List of extraterrestrial orbiters. Nsae Comp (talk) 09:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer a redirect to Satellite but I have no strong preference - just don't delete it :P Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:29, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Richard Mansergh St George

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
they|xe|🤷) 07:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

This is a page for an officer but it links to British Army. I don't think many readers are looking for the British Army page when they open this page. PercyPigUK (talk) 16:38, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Richard St George Mansergh-St George

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 restore and send to AfD.
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

This is a page for an officer but it links to British Army. I don't think many readers are looking for the British Army page when they open this page. PercyPigUK (talk) 16:37, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation)

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect created due to misidentification of

World Kabaddi Federation and subsequent page move. Later reverted after discussion at Talk:2019 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)#Governance of global Kabaddi and World Cups. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not gonna lie, I was torn about this one. On one hand, the World Kabaddi Federation did not organise the 2025 Kabaddi World Cup. On the other hand, I could see a user confusing World Kabaddi with World Kabaddi Federation, especially since the World Kabaddi Federation’s website is https://worldkabaddi.org. But I’m sure that someone typing “2025 World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation)” into the search bar would see “2025 World Cup (World Kabaddi)” in the results. Also, because the target article does not mention the World Kabaddi Federation (as I’m sure any ardent Kabaddi fan would notice), I think that to delete it would be the best option. Plant🌱man (talk) 17:20, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Junior minister

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. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the best course of action is. This presently goes to a page that never mentions this term at all. But it seems like it should. I've not found a better target. Also skeptical that this is a good thing to red-link since it might not make sense as a stand-alone article. People who live in parliamentary countries probably already have a clear sense in their minds of what this means, but others will not. From what I can tell, it definitely includes "Under-secretary of Foo" positions; it might or might not include "Secretary of Foo" or "Deputy Minister of Foo" positions (and whether it does or not might vary by country), and it excludes "Minister of Foo" positions, which are senior ministers, I gather (but Senior minister is a red link). I think the best result is to have at least a paragraph of content on what these terms mean, at the Minister (government) article. But maybe some stand-alone article(s), perhaps listing junior (and senior?) ministerial positions by country could be viable. In the interim, the redirect going to a page that provides no salient information is not helpful.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Some actual (stubby) content that used to be there [1] in various versions [2] suggests that even "Minister of Foo" positions can sometimes be junior ministers, so this is even more confusing than I anticipated, i.e. in even more need of proper encyclopedic coverage.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment would this possibly refer to Deputy minister? cookie monster 755 19:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • It does not refer to deputy minister, instead it refers to ministers of portfolios that are considered of more juniorly rank. Senior ministers are those of the foreign office, finance, war (and some few more) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "junior minister" is not restricted to government, it could also refer to religious personnel... -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It's a bit of an editorialised term, and can sometimes be used in a slightly deprecating way to suggest that someone is not very important. In very general terms in UK politics you have unambiguously "senior" ministers - secretaries of state - and unambiguously junior ministers - Parliamentary under-secretary of state - but also plenty in-between. Perhaps this from the IfG could be the basis for an article? I think the term is used with sufficient frequency that we owe it to our readers to try and explain it. ninety:one 18:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Term is sufficiently self-explanatory. What counts as a junior minister varies so much country to country that it's probably futile to find one suitable target. For example, in the UK "Secretaries of State" are senior ministers and the same (defunct) role in Canada were junior ministers. In some countries "
    parliamentary secretaries are junior ministers, in others they're not even ministers. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:33, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Christian democratic union of germany, CDU

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. The first three per

WP:RDAB (disambiguated titles with extra, missing, or misplaced spaces and brackets). None of these redirects are linked from any pages. Xoontor (talk) 14:48, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment:
Delete if someone were actually looking for these, they’d just type in “CDU”, “CDU (Germany)”, “Christian Democratic Union (Germany)”, “Christian Democratic Union”, “Christian Democratic Union of Germany”, or the German name of the party - not these titles. Third one comes pretty close but the extra comma is unneeded. Plant🌱man (talk) 17:33, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Nigel and Marvin

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 28#Nigel and Marvin

2026 Eliteserien

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete
WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

2026 Latvian Higher League

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete
WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

2026 Kazakhstan Cup

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 14:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No information at the target about the event, making the redirect misleading for anybody who searches for this event and is led to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete
WP:CRYSTAL Plant🌱man (talk) 17:35, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Harry Bōlz

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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:32, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Musk changed his twitter handle to this (a meme coin) for like two seconds a month ago. No one calls him this and it's not mentioned in target. Possibly relevant: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_February_19#Kekius_Maximus, another memecoin handle of his. Rusalkii (talk) 02:13, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

Dengismmm

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. Hog Farm talk 02:49, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Three m's is not a plausible typo. Cannot find any usage of this offwiki. Rusalkii (talk) 01:56, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment seems to have been the result of an erroneous move by User:LaparohMesa (see here). Also, User:Rusalkii, just out of curiosity, how do you find all these erroneous redirects? Plant🌱man (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPP, I patrol redirects. Rusalkii (talk) 04:30, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
But this (and Harry Bōlz) were created a month ago. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the last of the backlog is currently at Feb 5th, if you ignore the BLARs. I almost always patrol from the back of the queue. Rusalkii (talk) 04:43, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Got it. Thanks! Plant🌱man (talk) 04:54, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as implausible; result of an erroneous move that was reverted. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to add - self-reverted by the person who originally performed the move. Plant🌱man (talk) 04:32, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).

BRÖ

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 Peter Brötzmann. Jay 💬 15:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only place I can find referring to Austria as "BRÖ" is a post on an incel forum, which I will spare you all. Not mentioned in target. We have a few mentions of Peter Brötzmann's label by this title, possibly it should be retargetted there? Rusalkii (talk) 01:21, 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's
talk page or in a deletion review
).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_March_17&oldid=1284553832"