Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 9

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

November 9

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 9, 2025.

Eka Budianto

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 23:42, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

I can't find any evidence on google that this person's name is spelled Eka Budianto, rather than Eka Budianta. Maybe delete unless someone has an explanation? Duckmather (talk) 23:38, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

Jules Guerin

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 Jules Guérin and add {{R to diacritic}}. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 22:02, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

This should probably be disambiguated or retargeted. The current target is Jules Guérin (artist), but a completely different article, Jules Guérin, also exists. Epicgenius (talk) 22:48, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

Shake it like a Vinfast

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 23:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Delete as it's a made up phrase, not a slogan or anything. No idea who would search for this or what it could refer to. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Delete, Google search returns no results. I2Overcome talk 01:33, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Delete No idea what this is referring to (VinFast make cars, which is not something you can really "shake"), and not mentioned anywhere on the internet except for this redirect anyway User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Unordered

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 23:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Ambiguous, could refer to anything that lacks order. I2Overcome talk 20:48, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

With all due respect this redirect does see some usage : https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&start=2025-06-01&end=2025-11-09&pages=Unordered 🐲Jothefiredragon🔥talk🧨contributions✨log🐉 03:12, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
I didn't say anything about usage. The fact that it has been used doesn't mean that people are finding what they are looking for at the target article. There are other possible targets such as Unordered list, Unordered map, Unordered associative containers (C++), Unordered pair, etc. I don't think it makes sense for this redirect to exist, but if it does, is NaN#Comparison with NaN really the best target? I2Overcome talk 03:39, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. "Unordered" is an adjective that could apply to an infinite number of things. It does't have a primary topic on Wikipedia—its main meaning is a simple dictionary definition—and is not suitable for a dab page. As for usage, it gets about 1 hit per day which is quite low. Hardly anybody is searching the encyclopedia for this dictionary word which does not correspond to a specific subject, which makes sense. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
    Oppose retarget to Disorder, which has been suggested below. These aren't exactly synonymous and the overlap between their usage is too small for this to be useful. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
  • I'm tempted to suggest retargeting to the disambiguation page Disorder. I'd feel stronger about that if any of the existing topics would also be referred to as "unordered", or if I saw an elegant way to add NaN there. --BDD (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Far too ambiguous. Maybe create Unordered (NaN) (or similar) so it shows up in Search? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:49, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
    If the nominated redirect is deleted, I'd oppose this option because then we would have a case where a disambiguated title exists when its non-disambiguated title does not, which is essentially a WP:PRECISE violation. Steel1943 (talk) 07:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 00:28, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Well, that's just straight up ambiguous. Oppose retarget to Disorder since the concept of "unordered" is not exclusive to types of "disorder", such as ... not ordering something in a cart on an online marketplace, etc. Steel1943 (talk) 07:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Body soap

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#Body soap

2025 Donald Trump visit to the Middle East

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 List of international presidential trips made by Donald Trump#2025. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 20:30, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Trump also visited the Middle East in October. I2Overcome talk 20:21, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

Sotong

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 Singlish vocabulary#sotong. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 16:45, 12 November 2025 (UTC)

indonesian and(/or?) malay term with seemingly no affinity consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 13:11, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

  • Keep What does "seemingly no affinity" mean? Sotong literally means squid in both languages... I know we don't encourage excessive use of foreign terminology in articles and redirects, but it wouldn't be an unusual term to see and we have several articles on Malay dishes that use it. Perhaps a retarget to Squid as food would be better. Reywas92Talk 13:45, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
    "affinity" here means how significant any given alternate language term is to its topic in general, and how plausible that would make a redirect from that language. for example, "brasil" is a plausible redirect to brazil since it has demonstrably high affinity with portuguese (why is beyond me, though, don't they speak spanish?), but ब्राजिल, which is nepali for brazil, doesn't have affinity because there's no demonstrable relation between them that could warrant a redirect like that being plausible. in this case, indonesia and malaysia don't have any particular affinity with squid as far as wikipedia cares, with the word and countries both being unmentioned in the target and your proposed target
    this is all stuff covered in wp:forred, so i'll recommend going there consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 16:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
    don't they speak spanish? Nope, they speak Brazilian Portuguese, a fact noted on the Brazil Wikipedia page-- which is *why* the brazilian portuguese name of the country has affinity, a country's name written in its own native tongue will always have affinity. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:26, 22 October 2025 (UTC) (edit 17:28, 22 October 2025 (UTC))
    shh, don't explain the joke, or i might get outed as brazilian consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 19:03, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
  • It's defined at Singaporean cuisine#Seafood. There's an additional definition offered at Singlish vocabulary#S. -- Tavix (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Do not keep; there may be a suitable alternative to deletion but I'm not sure what the best option is. A cursory web search indicates the literal meaning is squid or cuttlefish (most often defined as just 'squid' or as either/both) and that the slang usage described at Singlish vocabulary#S is common. The word appears in many articles, usually in reference to food. It's also part of Malay cuisine, Malaysian cuisine (and possibly others?) so a redirect specifically to Singaporean cuisine seems improper. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk) 17:27, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Singlish vocabulary#sotong is the most helpful course of action. It has a link to wikt:sotong, both the squid and cuttlefish definitions, and a couple of extra definitions. It doesn't comment on Indonesian, but it is a very similar language to Malay. Alternative good options are keep (redirects from synonym, even without definition, tend to be understood by readers very naturally and easily) or retarget to wikt:sotong which has the most comprehensive set of definitions. Not enamoured with either deletion or disambiguation as a useful option here, so I don't think we can fit in the mention at So, Communication. J947 ‡ edits 20:47, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 18:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Retarget to Singlish vocabulary per J947 where sotong *is* listed. Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 08:08, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 19:14, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Singlish vocabulary seems the best choice. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 14:32, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Random City Titles

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 Marvellous City (along with The Marvelous City) to Cidade Maravilhosa. Delete Amazing City and Wonderful City. -- Tavix (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

I am unsure how it relates to the page... Valorrr (lets chat) 06:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete all. They seemingly refer to Cidade Maravilhosa, which was a march written for the 1935 Rio Carnival. The three terms are (supposedly) "mottos of the city of Rio", but I don't think they're particularly helpful and are more likely than not to lead searchers astray. 〜 Askarion ✉ 13:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 19:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
Delete the other two per Myceteae and Askarion. Jay 💬 16:34, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Dum Dums

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 move Dum Dums (lollipop) to Dum Dums. Suggested fixes were divergent but this was by far the most popular one, on the theory that the lollipop is the primary topic. I'll add a hatnote so readers can still get to the other uses and save the target page history as Jay suggested. Beland (talk) 07:34, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

These have different targets, but should probably be in sync. Should they both redirect to the lollipop article? Or the dab page? Left guide (talk) 04:36, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 19:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
Retarget both to → Dum Dum (disambiguation); strongly unconvinced that Dum Dums (lollipop) is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC - perhaps in the USA, but even then, there would be a (quite) high bar to show that this is a case of WP:PLURAL. "Dum dums" and "dum-dums" have been frequently used to refer to hollow-point or expanding bullets both in the US and abroad (e.g., The Gateway 1975, The Arlington Day 1970, Gunsmith Cats 2010, Long ridin' man 2015, Death minus one, 1996, An ordinary atrocity : Sharpeville and its massacre, 2001, Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa, 2013, Miami Showband Massacre, 2007, Haringey Advertiser, 2010, (more allegorical) Splattery, 2007 - only examples taken from sources that do not discuss early military history). I'd even consider based on what I have seen that the disambiguation page should be amended to include the most common use I have seen: Stupidity... Shazback (talk) 20:09, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Interesting, I wasn't familiar with the nickname for these bullets. Looking at Google Books and the sources you posted, while there is some inconsistency, the bullets are usually sentence case dum dums or dum-dums while the capitalized proper name Dum Dums almost always refers to the candy. The hyphen is almost always used for the bullets although some sources, including NYT, use Dum-Dums for the candy. Regular Google and DuckDuckGo searches and a Google News search exclusively return results for the candy. JSTOR returns many more hits for the bullet, with some variation, but most often lowercase and with a hyphen, dum-dums. ETA: And, notably, dumdum bullets are most often spelled as a single word. See this Ngram for example. This Ngram shows that they are more likely to be pluralized dumdum bullets than dumdums though of course both are used. This all supports the capitalization, spacing, and plural making the lollipops the primary topic for Dum Dums; perhaps Dum-Dums is more ambiguous. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC) Edited 15:44, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
P.S. I've added Stupidity to the dab page under 'See also'; it could perhaps be moved somewhere else on the page. I agree this informal usage is common although it does not show up as often in reliable sources. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:25, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget Dum-Dums to Dum Dum (disambiguation) as {{a2r|Dum Dums}}. The lollipop isn't the primary topic now, and remains ambiguous with expanding bullets (at least). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Move lollipop to Dum Dums per Myceteae; I'm convinced this is the primary topic per WP:DIFFCAPS even if "dum dums" was more commonly the bullet, which it doesn't appear to be. Rusalkii (talk) 19:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Dum Dums has a long page history from 2004, and I just tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. If there is consensus on the lollipop page move, then first move Dum Dums without leaving redirect to Dum Dums (disambiguation), which was bot-created in 2010 and doesn't hold a page history. Jay 💬 15:57, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Move Dum Dums (lollipop) to Dum Dums per Myceteae. -- Tavix (talk) 15:37, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
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).

Cary Huang

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Cary Huang

Thorncliffe, Thorncliffe, Kirkburton

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 23:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

My error in including the name twice before the qualifier, it was at this title for less than 2 days in 2010. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Delete Cannot see any point in retaining it. Keith D (talk) 16:42, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

TISE

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 The International Stock Exchange and add a hatnote to Tise (disambiguation) at the target. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

This is not a notable abbreviation in general use. It does not even appear in our Schrödinger equation article. No articles on Google Scholar use it. Google search does not return Schrodinger Equation for "TISE". Johnjbarton (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Disambiguate at Tise (disambiguation). There is also The International Stock Exchange, Ellen Tise, Tise (a Tibetan input method utility), and Tise, Maharashtra. BD2412 T 01:26, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
    • In fact, move Tise somewhere and disambiguate at that title. I have created Tise (disambiguation) for this purpose. I note that TISE in reference to the Schrödinger equation does appear to exist. BD2412 T 01:33, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
      The existence of an acronym in one unpublished source does not make it notable. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
      Agreed. One or even a handful of sources do not indicate that this is common, and certainly not far more commonly used to refer to the Schrödinger equation than the stock exchange. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
      "Notability" is not the test for inclusion of an abbreviation in an article or on a disambiguation page. To be mentioned in an article, it merely needs to be reliably sourced. To be mentioned on a disambiguation page, it merely needs to be mentioned in an article. BD2412 T 01:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
      TISE is not reliably source nor mentioned in an article except in a {{Redirect}} which I deleted. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:16, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
      Obscure abbreviations don't warrant inclusion in articles. I agree with Johnjbarton that a single, unpublished source is insufficient and I stand by my original statement that a small number of reliable sources would also not be enough. I tend to be rather inclusionist when it comes to dab pages, in the interest of helping even a small number of readers who might use a rare abbreviation, so I'm fine with leaving the time-independent Schrödinger equation on the dab page. It could be moved to 'See also' if necessary. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:06, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
      @BD2412 Are you ok if we point TISE to The International Stock Exchange and add a hatnote to it pointing to Tise (disambiguation)? Johnjbarton (talk) 00:06, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
      • I would not object to that, given that the proposed target is the clearest use of the acronym. BD2412 T 00:40, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Tise (disambiguation) The International Stock Exchange. I'm not convinced the dab page needs to be moved to the base name Tise. Massviews indicates ≈16:1 pageviews lead over Tise, Maharashtra. A more detailed assessment of primary topic could be presented at WP:RM if needed. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:37, 10 November 2025 (UTC) Edit: The International Stock Exchange is the only target that appears to be commonly referred to using all-caps TISE. Add a hatnote there to Tise (disambiguation). —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to The International Stock Exchange with hatnote to Tise (disambiguation) per Myceteae. --Lenticel (talk) 06:39, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Category:Members of the United States House of Representatives from Massacheusetts

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 23:44, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Soft redirect from a spelling error. Not needed, and the target has recently moved so the names aren't even similar any more. Mclay1 (talk) 15:39, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

St Paul's Shipwreck

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#St Paul's Shipwreck

Racisme anti-arabe

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 Anti-Arab racism. Rusalkii (talk) 03:08, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Fails WP:RLANG. Also "anti-arab racism" is not islamophobia per se. People can still be racist against Christian arabs. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Speedy retarget to Anti-Arab racism which is the exact French-to-English translation of "racisme anti-arabe". Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 18:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
But what does anti-Arab racism have to do with the French language? Traumnovelle (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Agree, still fails RLANG. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:46, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:42, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per Myceteae; Francophone countries are not particularly linked to the subject at hand. Ca talk to me! 11:47, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Anti-Arab racism per above. The sections on France and Algeria contain the vast majority of content on anti-Arab racism compared to all other European and African countries in that article, demonstrating affinity. J947 ‡ edits 08:11, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Kangaroo hop height

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. -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

We do not discuss the height of the hop at the target; this is more of a search term than a useful redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 21:21, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

@Rusalkii: Just a heads-up, I bundled in several other seemingly related redirects created by the same author around the same time, so we've got a total of seven now. Feel free to remove any of my additions you disagree with. Left guide (talk) 01:50, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all. I don't doubt that people search for these but since we have no content on the subject it is a disservice to send readers here. Folks wishing to read about kangaroos generally won't have trouble finding the article. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:46, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 13:32, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Kangaroo#Jump height, where I have added some information about the highest recorded hops. (I've changed the target regardless.) Would be nice if someone added information about the usual height and length of hops. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC).
  • Delete I was prepared to say keep to one or two of the more grammatically sound ones, but these were just created earlier this year by a user who was blocked for disruptive editing. Given that, I see no reason to keep. --BDD (talk) 03:43, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
    ✓ Agreed. I still favor deletion despite the added content. These all have awkward phrasing (to varying degrees) and are consistent with a pattern of disruptive editing rather than genuinely helpful redirects from common search terms. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:36, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete all per all. We don't even have kangoroo hop or kangaroo jump and a reader would go to kangaroo first, which is fair since we don't have an article on kangaroo jumping. Jay 💬 16:41, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Unlikely Redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Unlikely Redirects

Hotchips

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. As no one prefers the status quo, retargetting to French fries as the less destructive option. Hot Chips can be considered separately, per WP:DIFFCAPS. Rusalkii (talk) 23:34, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

No idea what Hotchips have to do with the IEEE. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:59, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

This isn't a notable conference, and it is named Hot Chips, not Hotchips. And if Hot Chips redirect to French fries, so should Hotchips. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to French fries, the target of hot chips. No opposition to renominating Hot Chips, but with the uppercase, that is a separate unconnected redirect. Jay 💬 17:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget to French fries? Or to a restored Hot Chips?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:12, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. French fries aren't called "Hotchips", and neither is anything else on Enwiki as far as I can see. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:21, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget to French fries, Hot Chips, or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:59, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to French fries. Fries (chips) are called "hot chips" in Australia and someone could easily be searching for that just without using a space. Mclay1 (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Completely unnecessary. Hot chips are not commonly known as hotchips. Frenchfries and Potatochips are redlinks too, and for good reason. 162 etc. (talk) 22:09, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Bnuuy

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 with a functional WP:NCRET outcome of soft redirect to wikt:bnuuy, particularly as I see sizable support for this option and no direct opposition to it. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 06:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

See previous RFDs: 1 Sep 2022 and 18 Sep 2025 UtherSRG (talk) 23:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm amenable to having the target changed per the below discussion. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
  • Keep: the link is a semi-plausible misspelling for "bunny" and is now discussed in the article, where it's directly relevant. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:39, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
    (Would it be reasonable for me to ping major contributors to the article and people who have commented on the redirect before?) – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 23:41, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
    You can ping all participants in the two past RfD discussions or other relevant discussions, or a broad swath of major contributors to Rabbit, if you think that would benefit the project. Selectively rallying editors who have added and advocated for bnuuy content would of course be inappropriate. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
    Mentioning @Reconrabbit as the biggest contributor to rabbit (and bunny-related content on Wikipedia in general). – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:33, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
    I don't think there is much precedent for a wiktionary redirect among internet slang (wikt:fops doesn't have a soft redirect because fop exists and wikt:amogus is too famous and already fairly internet-centric, warranting the redirect amogus), and for a topic with such a large breadth (a polyphyletic clade of mammals that have influenced culture since the Roman Empire and maybe before it) the sourcing is a little weak for a whole section about a misspelling. Not that I have a hare in this race (see dodent which is a somewhat more plausible misspelling than bnuuy IMO but might find itself at RfD eventually). -- Reconrabbit 18:33, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Comment. Just a quick note that the new mention at the target alluded to above is a pretty gross misrepresentation of the source -- the article currently says: "In internet memes, a rabbit is often called a "bnuuy", a deliberate humorous misspelling of "bunny".[214]" While all the source says is "Indonesian artist Bnuuy (a popular internet slang for “Bunny”) is taking matters into her own hands ..." and that's it. If anyone here thinks this should be kept, especially at the main Rabbit article, I'd urge them to source this properly to something a bit more substantial, with somewhat more to say on the topic first. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 05:57, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
    Agree that is inadequate sourcing. The entire section is weak and does not demonstrate notability of the meme phenomena relative to the subject of rabbits. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:29, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
    a popular internet slang for “Bunny” is being cited for the claim In internet memes, a rabbit is often called a "bnuuy" here; I don't think that's a "gross misrepresentation of the source". If you think the citation should be moved up to the first clause to be more clear what's being cited to this source, that's fine. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:56, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
    gross misrepresentation is a bit of an overstatement but this is still grossly inadequate sourcing for the statement it was used to support, and to establish notability or relevance worthy of inclusion at all in the Rabbit article. It's an example of a trivial mention as defined at WP:SIGCOV. Information Note: This discussion would be more appropriate to continue at Talk:Rabbit#Rabbits in internet memes. Responding here since this concerns statements made in this RfD. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete and consider salting due to repeated re-creation and inappropriate addition of content to the target article in an attempt to justify its existence. The meme is entirely non-notable and in no way suitable for inclusion at Rabbit. I have removed the internet and meme culture from Rabbit. I agree with IP35 that the source for "bnuuy" did not support the statement made. A Google News search for "bnuuy" turns up only one hit, this from WP:KNOWYOURMEME, which doesn't even mention "bnuuy". This is a remarkable lack of coverage. Even obscure memes will sometimes have a handful of stories in reliable-ish sources (and a few such stories do not establish notability). —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
    Salting seems a bit extreme given it's been recreated exactly once. (With an unrelated undeletion requested by another user per Wikipedia:SOFTDELETE.) I added the content since I think rabbit-related internet memes are notable enough to deserve 2-3 sentences in a section about rabbits in culture, which doesn't strike me as all that unreasonable. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 18:24, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
    I disagree about the notability and have responded to you at Talk:Rabbit#Rabbits in internet memes. I agree with Reconrabbit's statements above that the sourcing and overall coverage is extremely limited relative to the other cultural depictions of rabbits in the article. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Comment: @Consarn, Steel1943, and Rosguill: Ping for all participants of the previous RFDs. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    oh well, there goes my plan of just letting this one go by consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 00:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    In for a pneey, in for a pnoud... or something like that... XD - UtherSRG (talk) 15:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    You missed @Freedom4U and @RossEvans19, I think. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
    I had only pinged the participants of the previous RFDs. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:57, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
  • delete as just plain ol' unmentioned. again. mild opposition towards salting, since i don't think it's unlikely that someone will find a good source someday consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 00:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    Do you agree with the deletion of this section? If the section is restored, do you think the redirect should be kept? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 18:11, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
    yeah, it's not really due here. no opposition to retargeting to wiktionary, by the way consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 22:24, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete. Alphabet soup. Steel1943 (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    Could you clarify what you mean, or why you think that means it should be deleted? Keep in mind WP:IDLI. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 18:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
    My fault for trying to have fun, I guess. DELETE AS AN UNLIKELY MISSPELLING. ...Is that better? Steel1943 (talk) 07:23, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Retarget to wikt:bnuuy where it's explained. -- Tavix (talk) 03:51, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
    No objections to soft redirect. If not redirected, do you think it should be deleted or kept as a redirect to Rabbit? – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Soft redirect to wikt:bnuuy. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 16:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Redirect to wikt:bnuuy :) RossEvans19 (talk) 23:38, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'd like to note precedent from previous internet meme redirects of silly animal names: doggo, birb, kitteh. (In general, popular memes seem to link to Wiktionary, e.g. eepy.) – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 02:36, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
    Doggo and birb both redirect to DoggoLingo and kitteh redirects to Lolcat. These are independently notable memes that have their own articles or are covered in other meme articles. These are not mentioned in the main articles Dog, Bird, and Cat. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
    Sure, but I don't think memes about rabbits are notable enough for a whole separate article*, which is why I instead placed these facts in the most closely-related article I could find.
    * I'd be very happy to be proven wrong on this – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
    I was just noting that the precedent you cited doesn't apply here given the present consensus against including 'bnuuy' anywhere on en-wiki. My impression is that Rabbits in internet and meme culture is not a notable topic but you can always try drafting an article or submitting via WP:AFC. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:21, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or soft redirect to wiktionary?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

McRonald's

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. R3. The Bushranger One ping only 21:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Recently created and unlikely typo so suggesting delete. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:52, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

Tampo, FL

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. Complex/Rational 16:58, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Highly implausible "misspelling" of Tampa. I don't believe this redirect has any use; has been hit once in the last 30 days (aside from mine nominating it). The Bushranger One ping only 06:07, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom, and it looks like the creator was blocked a few hours ago. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 09:32, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 11:27, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:03, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete not a possible search term, and as noted ArthananWarcraft, I think it might be a vandalism. Asteramellus (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Frozen desert

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Frozen desert

Tree Dollar

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. Complex/Rational 16:57, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Redirect created by User:Winnebaggo whose creations are being discussed. This doesn't appear to be a likely search term, although Google searches for "Tree Dollar" do indeed bring results for Dollar Tree, I can't find anything to suggest that it is a common name for DT, slang or otherwise. Aydoh8[what have I done now?] 05:27, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

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).

Mariz Ricketts

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. Complex/Rational 16:58, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
Previous AfDs for this article:

Actress mentioned at several pages. incuding Asawa ng Asawa Ko, Stolen Life (Philippine TV series), Apoy sa Langit and Ikaw Sana. This redirect should be deleted per WP:REDLINK. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariz Ricketts each resulting in redirect. ~2025-32058-96 (talk) 02:52, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete. A good case of encouraging article creation. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:46, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

PlayStation 7

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. Rusalkii (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Far too soon. I don't think this will be necessary at all until at least the PS6's release. There is also no guarantee that the PS7 will have that name or be released at all. Both of these points also apply to PlayStation 6 to a lesser extent, but I think that redirect is probably fine as it is. I am RedoStone (talk) 01:20, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete PlayStation 7 per nom. It is way too soon and there is, predictably, no discussion of PS7 at PlayStation given that PS6 has not even been released. Do not bundle PlayStation 6 with this nomination. I refined PlayStation 6's target to PlayStation#Future consoles. There's been a bit of back and forth with 6's target and there is a working draft at Draft:PlayStation 6. I think that redirect is appropriate but if someone disagrees it should be nominated separately since it has a distinct set of considerations. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
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).

Michael Kovach

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#Michael Kovach

Crossrail Lines 2 and 3

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. The Bushranger One ping only 00:36, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Implausible search term. Crossrail 2 has an article and Crossrail 3 is a redirect to Crossrail. "line 2", "line 3", and "lines 2 and 3" not mentioned in target article. JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 00:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete per non and WP:XY. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:47, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. Good spot! --10mmsocket (talk) 07:33, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 11:28, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
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).