Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28

< June 27

June 29 >

June 28

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 28, 2024.

Sepersontics

• Sepersontics → Semantics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The term "sepersontics" is not defined in this or any other articles (nor should it be). From my web searches, only 7 results have come up, including a satirical blog post and a forum comment. This is a protologism used only by a half-dozen people (perhaps even less). Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. I couldn't find anything substantial either. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Delete my search didn't turn up anything too. Per WP:R#DELETE #8 Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Raymoo

• Raymoo → List of Touhou Project characters#Reimu Hakurei  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

raymoo hackery is a name generally only seen in shitposts, and i'd honestly be surprised if anyone not nose deep on every touhou rabbit hole knew about it. fittingly, not mentioned in the target, implausible as an actual search (unless you're me), and google gave me nothing reliable cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Tentative Keep and tag as meme. It's plausible that someone finds one of said shitposts, doesn't know how the original name is spelled, and searches "raymoo" to find info on Reimu. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Tentative Keep. I personally believe that it is a genuine misspelling or respelling, but you would probably be hard-pressed to find a reliable source that mentions it being a meme or shitpost. Honestly, I don't even remember making this redirect in 2012, but I doubt that "Raymoo Hackery" ever crossed my mind since we would be discussing a "Raymoo Hackery" redirect as well. Regardless, the outcome doesn't really matter to me, so do what you may. — Nameless^(?) 13:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

in your defense, it's funny cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Wokepedia

• Wokepedia → Andrew Orlowski  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The similarly spelled Wokipedia redirects to Criticism of Wikipedia#Partisanship. Since the term is no longer used by just Orlowski and both spellings are common as criticism of Wikipedia they should have consistent locations or whether the redirects are necessary at all as they are a violation of redirect neutrality. 92.40.204.110 (talk) 17:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to Criticism of Wikipedia#Partisanship. As per WP:RNEUTRAL redirects do not need to be neutral; anyone who finds the term 'Wokepedia' (or 'Wokipedia'), doesn't know context, and plugs it into our searchbox should be taken to the info we have on the subject. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget per Lunamann --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Redirects to Herzegovina#Medieval period

• Duchy of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Duchy of herzegovina → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Duchy of Herzegovina → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Dukedom of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Duchy of St. Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Herzegovina of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Duchy of St Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Duchess of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These redirect titles are misnomers; it does not exist in scholarship on the subject in this form. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 17:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• The redirect Duchy of Saint Sava cannot be deleted. It has a substantial history. Srnec (talk) 20:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
  • This redirect, and other similar redirects that were listed above, should not be deleted since previous actions were result of an improper merge, as was indicated here. The long standing article "Duchy of Saint Sava" should be restored, not deleted, since it was reduced to a redirect without proper discussion or consensus. Sorabino (talk) 00:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

    There was absolutely nothing improper about the merge. Indeed, I think it's a borderline WP:ARBMAC violation that you keep pushing this unsubstantiated line after being given literally years to produce evidence for your position, all of which is well documented on the Talk page. --Joy (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

  "Duchy" article/redirect(s) was no more-no less than unsourced WP:SOAPBOX for the subject matter now finally properly framed and sourced in Humska zemlja article, however, I understand what you mean for that particular redirect so I scraped it from this nom. Thanks @Srnec:! ౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Oh boy, the history dive (or specifically, the talkpage archive dive) was *interesting.*
  It turns out, that talks of big change at the article for Duchy of Saint Sava have been going on since 2021 at the latest; from renaming to merging. user:Sorabino (who's already here) and user:Santasa99 (listed the redirects here) were two of the biggest voices in those discussions, joined by user:Joy, user:Thhhommmasss, and user:Mhare, among others (there was even drama regarding a sockmaster. Fun!)

At this point it is quite clear that there's some sort of conflict resolution that needs to happen between Santa and Sorabino; I don't know exactly what needs to be done, but this feud has gone on far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity. My first instinct is to restore Duchy of Saint Sava and send to AfD as a contested merge, if that helps anything. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• (I intruded into a middle of 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 post or she left too much space between rows which I confused as two distinct posts/posters, either way this comment of mine is unintentionally in the middle of Lunamann's post.) It's not fun, it wasn't fun, it was time and energy-wasting endeavor to push (or prevent, depending on which side of the argument one is) something that has no bases in historiography and is tendentious (even very close to discourse flirting with nationalistic point-of-view on history) - as another, one you missed to mention, neutral and uninvolved editor, User:DeCausa, noticed and argued in that long discussion. DeCausa starts with this remark: Should this article exist? There’s virtually nothing about this Duchy in the text of this article. It seems to be merely a vehicle to acknowledge the existence of the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santasa99 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

  It's not fun, it wasn't fun That was sarcasm. Dealing with socking is never fun. Also, I used "among others" as a catchall for people I neglected to mention, including DeCausa, you silly. Listing EVERYONE would've taken too much time and effort lol
  Other than that, I'm gonna bow out of this lol. This has quite quickly reached Above My Pay Grade level, as I've already touched on in my reply to Santa ^^; 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

  I actually thought that this first para of your post (above) was one of the involved editor's stance which would really be inappropriate after everything we went through back then. This also include my remark on DeCause -I was convinced that the first para of your post was one of the involved editors' comment. All is OK. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 22:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Don't mind me, just moving this out from the middle of my post ^^; Hope I got the time right 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• Fortunately, your instinct is utterly wrong since all of the options were exhausted, and conclusion was reached eventually after years of patient waiting, discussing, waiting, presenting arguments, waiting > Talk:Duchy of Saint Sava/Archive 2. We won't run around in circle because someone whishes to restore unrefed soapbox ౪ Santa ౪^99° 12:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

But I can't help but notice how you correctly concluded how "this feud has gone on far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity", and then in attempt to help, you nonchalantly (in bold) suggested to go all the way back to beginning of what in essence was the "feud far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity" and start it all over again (that's years back and against n-bytes long discussion that actually had its conclusion in consensus to merge, which had positive consequence in creation of proper article on the subject matter based on sourced facts). Allow me to say, please don't help us :-) ౪ Santa ౪^99° 13:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't pretend to know what's best here ^^; My wheelhouse is RfD, not conflict resolution

Please ignore my recommendation up there and do something else ^^; 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Joy would probably explain this more eloquently vis-a-vis policies and guidelines and wikivoice-wise.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 13:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• I would evaluate this differently - we can keep any of these WP:POVTITLE redirects if there's reasonable likelihood that an average English reader might stumble upon a term described by the redirect somewhere relevant, and the search engine output wouldn't get them to the right place. --Joy (talk) 19:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
• Those redirects should have never been proposed for deletion in the first place, particularly the present redirect "Duchy of Saint Sava" with its important talk page history, nor it was proper to reduce the previously long standing article to a redirect without discussion and consensus. It is quite clear, from the talk page history, that after a long pause (more then a year) discussions were renewed there on 25 April 2024, and a very selective "merge" was conducted already on 26 April 2024, only a day later, thus reducing the long standing article to a redirect. Non of that was done in a proper way, nor it was justified, and community should take into consideration all of those questions. Sorabino (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

  Anyone interested in this should read a short analysis of Sorabino's (not exactly complete) narrative and the history of this issue Here. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 13:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for reminding the community on the history of these disputes. Administrators of English Wikipedia should also be aware that back in 2021, similar disruptive changes were attempted in relation to the same article on Bosnian Wikipedia, but those unilateral actions were reverted by administrators of that project, who had to protect that article against vandalism (here). It should be also noted that similar articles on the same historical subject, related to feudal polity called the Duchy of Saint Sava (1448-1482), currently exist on 13 (thirteen) Wikipedia projects, with their stable scopes and identical titles. The only proper outcome would be to restore the article here on EW, and reopen the discussion on all relevant subjects. Sorabino (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Now, out of desperation, you simply spreading aspersions - especially by misinforming, to put it mildly, readers about what happened in Bosnian Wiki. I put together that post so that anyone interested can see how it played out regarding article and TP history, who did what and how, who argued what and what was the community stance since 2000's. We are done, you and me. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 16:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

You are wasting everybody's time for years now, with your continuous attempts to discredit a legitimate historical subject (Duchy of Saint Sava). Please, take a look at a very recent scholarly paper (2019) by dr Luka Špoljarić, a Croatian historian from the History department of the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb. Writing on Stjepan Vukčić Kosača (the first duke of Saint Sava), Špoljarić stated (page 156): In 1449, in order to emphasize his independence from the Bosnian king and cater to the sensibilities of his Orthodox subjects, he took the title of Duke of St Sava, in honour of the Serbian saint whose relics were held in the Mileševa monastery located in the easternmost parts of his duchy. While this large and powerful Duchy thus remained outside of papal influence, the Catholicization in the king’s land continued. In the same paper, Špoljarić included a historical map (page 158), presenting geopolitical situation in 1460, with the Duchy of St Sava. That is just one of many possible additions to the long list of scholarly sources on the subject, that were already mentioned in previous discussions on relevant talk pages. Please, inform yourself, reconsider your recent actions, and revert your dubious reduction of that long standing article to a redirect. Sorabino (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

This is more of the same scraping Google for phrases and key words - Špoljarić is historian of Catholic Church and Renaissance,and mentioned this phrase literally in passing. I will not revert my "dubious reduction" because it was not some unilateral move but a result of a consensus reached between Joy, Mharre, Mikola, Tezwoo, and DeCausa; it was done after two years of waiting for you to provide reason not to move it, and on the suggestion of Joy ! ౪ Santa ౪^99° 17:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Keep redirects The name Duchy of Saint Sava and its variants is attested to in more than half a century of scholarly literature:

• Pitcher, Donald Edgar (1972), An Historical Geography of the Ottoman Empire: From Earliest Times to the End of the Sixteenth Century, Leiden, Netherlands: BRILL, p. 71, After the death of Tvrtko I in 1391 the Bosnian Empire collapsed, and the land was torn between civil war and encroachment by Hungarians and Serbs, while the south-west gradually became independent as the 'Duchy of St. Sava' or Herzegovina (from 1435, though the title does not appear before 1446).
• Petrovich, Michael Boro (1976), A History of Modern Serbia, 1804-1918, Volume 1., New York City: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, p. xvii, The Serbs of Hercegovina (the Duchy of Saint Sava), Bosnia, and the Croatian lands of Dalmatia, Croatia Proper, and Slavonia also played a significant role in the rise of the modern Serbian nation.
• M. Th. Houtsma et al. E.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam 1913-1936 . Leiden, Netherlands: BRILL, 1993, 755. "The history of Bosnia from 1137 to 1878 may be divided into six periods. I. Bosnia under Bans who ruled the whole land (1137-1251). II. Bosnia under Bans who ruled various parts contemporaneously (1251-1314). III. the period of the two Kotromans (1314-1377). IV. the Bosnian kingdom and the Duchy of St. Sava (1377-1463)."
• Zlatar, Zdenko. Our Kingdom Come: The Counter-Reformation, the Republic of Dubrovnik, and the Liberation of the Balkan Slavs. Boulder, Colorado: East European Monographs, 1992, 414. "...came to see him as "ambassadors of the Patriarch and in the name of the Voivodas and Barons of that province " /i.e . Serbia / "of Bosna , the Duchy of St. Sava" / i.e. Hercegovina..." [1]
• Nicol, Donald M (1997), Theodore Spandounes: On the Origins of the Ottoman Emperors, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, p. xv, Another branch of the post-Byzantine ruling families in the Balkans with whom Theodore Spandounes could claim a connection was that of the Duchy of St. Sava in Bosnia.
• Elsie, Robert (2003), Early Albania: A Reader of Historical Texts, 11th-17th Centuries, Wiesbaden, Germany: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, p. 53, Lord Ercecho was Lord of the Duchy of Saint Sava which was situated in the Kingdom of Bosnia in the direction of Ragusa (Dubrovnik) and borders on Ragusan territory and Castelnuovo (Hercog-Novi) , which belongs to him.
• Short, Elliot (2022), Building a Multiethnic Military in Post-Yugoslav Bosnia and Herzegovina, New York City: Bloomsbury, p. 18, The Kindom of Hungary occupied territory in northern Bosnia during the conquest to build a military frontier against the Ottomans, while the herzog managed to preserve the independence of the Duchy of Saint Sava until 1481.
• Djukanovic, Bojka (2023), Historical Dictionary of Montenegro, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, p. 39, By the middle of the 15th century, northern parts of the Bay region became incorporated into the Duchy of St. Sava (Vojvodstvo Svetog Save).

If the name of this polity is bogus , as Santasa claims, then surely all these scholars have been bamboozled. But let's leave it to an anonymous wiki editor like Santasa to tell us the real WP:TRUTH. Yes, the duchy went by different names, so I guess I can see why a good-faith editor might consider a renaming discussion, but trying to have even the redirects deleted (and in such a ham-fisted way, too) is way beyond the pale. This encyclopedia should not be a place for nationalist axe-grinding. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 18:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Yellow plant

• Yellow plant → Heavy equipment  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

...because they're referred to as "plants" and are sometimes yellow? i don't get it. i'm not entirely sure if disambiguating or retargeting to a pre-existing disambiguation about something about things that are yellow and known as plants would be a better option than keeping or deleting, but will lean towards dabifying cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Common term in UK and Ireland. Could be retargeted to Yellow goods (construction and agriculture). Stifle (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The arm test

• The arm test → Michael W. Ryan  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No explanation/mention in the article. There was this in the past, but none of this content is in the current version. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:39, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

"arm test" could refer to any mix of actions known as tests performed on or with things known as arms, like arm wrestling or firearm maintenance. delete as vague cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:14, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

increasingly long redirects to bobobo-bo bo-bobo

• Bobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

in order, those are 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, and 13 too many bo's. all redirects created by one user. one or two extra syllables would be fine, but starting at 4 seems excessive, also bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo and bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo got skipped cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:44, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

ngl im surprised they didnt do Bobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobobo

But seriously, delete, just so Wikipedia doesn't spend more money than they have to on these seemingly unneeded redirects...

wait, this was made in 2010? Kxeon (talk) 23:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

that's 79 syllables, 72 too many :kekw: cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Gaō

• Gaō → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

that's an onomatopeia for growling. probably not primarily associated with the anime equivalent of xra. used to redirect to gaoh, but i don't think that would cut it either cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Bo^7

• Bo^7 → Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

the 7nd root of bo is bo, as there's only one bo. if there were two, the result would be 128 bo's. also implausible search, i guess cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Move to 7 x Bo for mathematical accuracy Obviously a joke redirect Delete Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Garage Band (TV series)

• Garage Band (TV series) → Grojband  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Garage band (TV series) → Grojband  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• GarageBand (TV series) → Grojband  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Garageband (TV series) → Grojband  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This TV series is not called "Garage Band". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - it's not called "Garage Band" but it's meant to be pronounced like "garage band", and it is the only TV show listed on Garage band (disambiguation). It's a plausible misspelling if someone has only heard the name of the show said vocally. BugGhost🪲👻 10:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

SportAccord

• SportAccord → Global Association of International Sports Federations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Removal/deletion of current redirect as it creates misleading impression. The redirect page reflects the name of a separate organization with its own initiatives whereas the target page reflects another organization that is now dissolved. In the current target page there's even a proposal on the Talk page from someone addressing this confusion. There should be a separate page and information about the redirect page of SportAccord JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 14:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Hard to say, maybe we can just rename that GAISF article again to be SportAccord? Notified both WP:SPORTS and WP:Switzerland. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions. JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, that's why that SportAccord has its own Wikidata item just because of entirely different entities, but then it meets own notability for separating? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

• Keep since it is mentioned at the target, so I honestly see no reason for deletion. This is clearly a plausible redirect, and a valid {{R from move}}. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Tristan Tate

• Tristan Tate → Andrew Tate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as misleading. This redirect was created a minute after the second deletion discussion closed, first pointing to the whole article and then to a subsection concerning the Romanian case(s), on what seems to me to be the very good reason that they are different people. During the GA drive this change was reverted. As it stands, the references to Tristan are sprinkled throughout the article, so it's hard to pick a single place to point the redirect at; but they are different people, and the current outcome suggests that to the unwary they aren't. Given the AfD outcome, I would suggest that deletion of the redirect and reliance on how search engines actually work is the best resolution of this so that those looking will get a succinct and accurate answer; failing that, the AfD could be reconsidered, or Andrew Tate's article could be so structured as to give a redirect some place to point to. The current arrangement, though, treats him like Zaphod Beeblebrox's second head. Mangoe (talk) 00:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

• Comment New RfD's go below the header, not above it. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
• Re-target to Andrew Tate#In Romania: 2022–present per WP:BLP1E, where is he referenced under "Tate brothers" (that can be amended to "Tate and his brother Tristan" for first usage). 1E was the strong argument for deletion of the article second time around, despite not being mentioned in the closing summary, so redirecting to any other part of the article doesn't make sense based on his notability. Additionally, a redirect that is used 20 times a day does appear useful, but being pointed at Andrew Tate directly can be confusing for readers, even if he is mentioned from the lead onwards. I'm not sure why TheMainLogan changed the redirect back in March. I'm otherwise convinced that this redirect existed long before March and that the page history is missing after the 2nd AfD, but could be wrong. Maybe an admin could clarify. CNC (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

  I won't even lie, I pointed the redirect at Andrew directly because they're basically the same guy. —theMainLogan (t•c) 15:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

  @TheMainLogan yeah but in my opinion, they are not. Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different. Mr Vili talk 00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  "Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different." Then why shouldn't he have his own article? —theMainLogan (t•c) 03:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

• Delete and Restore Tristan Tate Draft I believe the redirect should be deleted, and Tristan Tate is notable enough to have his own page, I suggest the original page be undeleted, and converted into a Draft where further editing can be done to the original page in order to move it into mainspace Mr Vili talk 08:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

  While this isn't the place to debate notability (the talk page would be better) the source assessment in the 2nd AfD demonstrated only one article with WP:SIGCOV, hence notability was not proven beyond BLP1E. Since this AfD he is now accused in a second investigation in the UK, but per the closing summary of that AfD, WP:PERP is still an issue here. Even if another draft is worked on, the mainspace article still requires a decision on either deleting, keeping or redirecting. CNC (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

• Refine to the section per CommunityNotesContributor. This is without prejudice to the former article content being worked on in draft, but unless and until an article is accepted (and such an article would need to demonstrate notability unrelated to the single incident) readers are better served by the redirect pointing to the content in his brother's article. Thryduulf (talk) 10:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Gallophone

• Gallophone → Geographical distribution of French speakers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. In the weird position of having a whole lot of online dictionaries claiming it means "French-speaking", starting with wikt:Gallophone, but I can't find a single such usage. Actual usage is rare but seems to be related to Gaul, not France or the French, e.g. Gallocentrism (thought I can't find a single one of its sources to check if they use the word that way). Rusalkii (talk) 22:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Have you tried asking wikt:WT:RFV about the Wiktionary entry? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

No, but it does look like the original creator @Thryduulf is an RfD regular, tagging them in to see if they have thoughts. (Sorry for dragging out decades-old pages!) Rusalkii (talk) 07:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

There are five quotations on the Wiktionary entry, all giving examples of use. I don't remember creating that (it was 2010) but the quotes have been there since start. A couple of minutes has found another three uses [2] [3][4] on Google books and it can also be found in our Gallocentrism article . I also came across [5] and [6] which use the word with different meanings (the first possibly related to Galilee, the second is in the context of Welsh so I'd guess from Gaelic).

Additionally, I'm seeing a few sources mentioning a Gallophone Records from the 1930s, with one that is probably not a reliable source, stating that it later became Gallo Records, but even if true this would be a partial title match. Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Rereading the initial post here, it's not unique in having a meaning related to France while being etymologically related to Gaul - wikt:Gallic being the most obvious. Thryduulf (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - The attestations provided by wiktionary, plus the additional mentioned above, are enough to a) determine that this is a plausible thing to search, and b) determine that the current target is appropriate. Fieari (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

JDX

• JDX → KJDX  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Doesn't appear to be the primary topic for "JDX"; quick google gives "JDX Performance Golf Apparel", "Job Builder JDX", "Jobs and Employment Data Exchange", a racing company, an instagram artist, guitar amplifier, etc. I can't even find the radio station. Hard to create a disambig page because none of these have wikipedia pages. Rusalkii (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

• Disambiguate per nom. BD2412 T 19:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Never mind primary topic say, I can't find anything worthy of this becoming a DAB page with nothing created anyway in terms of articles yet, after looking at this title's page history. And BD2412, it seems the nominator was suggesting titles of articles of note worthy topics now but not yet created even to be considered for this at the moment.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

Grand Duke of Hum redirects

• Sandalj Hranić, Grand Duke of Hum → Sandalj Hranić  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Vlatko Vukovic, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Vlatko Vuković, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Extension to bio's name in the article tile is misnomer in form of implausible noble title. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)