Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 June 14

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 16:53, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• Apartheid in North Korea → Allegations of apartheid by country#North Korea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

North Korea isn't mentioned in the target article. I don't think there's a suitable redirect as Racism in North Korea doesn't mention apartheid and Africa–North Korea relations only discusses apartheid in South Africa. Suonii180 (talk) 15:37, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment North Korea was mentioned. In June 2024 though there was an edit war over the inclusion of that section (and the on relating to Iran) between Luxorcin (blocked as a sockpuppet in July 2024) and Kashmiri (blocked by arbcom in August 2024) which ended without the content present. The content in the last revision with the section is borderline. If the two sources were obviously high quality I'd say it was definitely due for inclusion, if they were obviously low quality I'd say it definitely wasn't however they aren't either. My gut feeling is the first source is of middling to low quality while the second is middling to high - which doesn't bring me down on either side of the fence. Ideally someone with more subject matter knowledge than me would opine. One thing I am certain of is that there is no relevant content elsewhere on Wikipedia, so the only options I'd support are restore (and refine to the section) or delete. Thryduulf (talk) 02:24, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:47, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Thryduulf's analysis. The redirect can be recreated if a consensus emerges to include the previous content, but given the borderline sourcing I doubt it will happen any time soon. मल्ल (talk) 01:38, 16 June 2026 (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).

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. If you're willing and able to create an article on the subject, go for it! -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:12, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

• Magnesium aluminum silicate → Diosmectite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Magnesium Aluminum Silicate → Pyrope  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Magnesium aluminium silicate → Pyrope  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It seems rather confusing that inserting an "i" in aluminum results in a different target. Note that the redirect without the "i" between "n" and "u" had its target changed in 2018, though I'm sure if that change should have happened. Mathguy2718 (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note that I also added Magnesium Aluminum Silicate. It is also confusing why capitalization would make a difference for the intended target. Mathguy2718 (talk) 22:57, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to Pyrope, diosmectite contains other elements as well. Delete if there are other minerals that contain only magnesium, aluminium, and silicate. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:00, 26 May 2026 (UTC)
• Lean delete per WP:RETURNTORED. There are many Mg-Al silicates. What is needed is a broad concept article like we have for aluminum silicate. (We could use the same for magnesium silicate, or at least a set index instead of the current redirect.) Mdewman6 (talk) 01:05, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:46, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per Mdewman6. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 23:34, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
• Regarding the nom's confusion on the inconsistencies, the 3 redirects were created by 3 different editors in 2005, 2012 and 2013! Two of them are inactive, but I have just notified the third. Jay 💬 03:48, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete to free name for an article. Current situation is actually harmful for search. A decent disambiguation will require the same skills and similar time as a much more useful WP:broad concept. --Викидим (talk) 00:10, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
• delete per Mdewman6 --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:10, 16 June 2026 (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).

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) 18:10, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

• Article merge → Merge  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I propose deletion. This took some digging and I suspect there may be more context that I've not been able to locate. The page is fully protected; I will leave an edit request for this redirect to be tagged.

This was originally a cross-name redirect ("XNR" or "CNR") to Wikipedia:Proposed mergers. Per the first linked discussion, the history, and the deletion log, this was deleted (twice?) 20 years ago (June 2006) and then recreated a few months later (September 2006) as a redirect to Merge. The second RfD involved multiple redirects. It closed as 'keep' although there was limited discussion of this redirect specifically and the other two that were nominated have since been deleted so it is not clear that the reasoning holds. There was a suggestion to tag this as {{R with old history}} but this was not done. There appears to be some disagreement as to the time period that counts as 'old history' but I've seen it suggested that the cut-off is circa March 2002, more than four years before this redirect was recreated. There is no substantive edit history but this does get some pageviews. Nothing on the Merge dab page matches this description although there is a hatnote to Wikipedia:Merging, which is the likeliest thing someone would be searching for.

Even if this is not deleted, it is valuable to confirm and more clearly document consensus as to what should be done with this, and why. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Article merging is one of the few internal processes that it is important that we keep accessible to very new editors, including those who don't yet know about things like namespaces. This redirect captures a very likely search term while not dumping those not looking for that into projectspace. Thryduulf (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete. Targeting the dab page is silly, because none of the entries there have anything to do with "article". Rather, this seems to match a hatnote, which is just...not good. I'm generally opposed to that hatnote being there, but that's a side issue here. If you want an XNR, then make the XNR (I don't think we should, hence my delete vote), but don't target a dab page with a self-ref hatnote just to avoid one. Merging is hardly a common process that needs to be reader-facing, and even a newbie editor has more straightforward paths to get help with stuff, like the help desk, other prominent help links, etc. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:57, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete or retarget given the DAB page doesn't contain anything on article merge apart from the hatnote to Wikipedia:Merging so I suggest either delete or retarget to Wikipedia:Merging. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:20, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment: Neither Wikipedia:Article merge nor Help:Article merge exist, but Merging articles is a redirect to Wikipedia:Merging. Mathguy2718 (talk) 21:43, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

  Good find. I request that Merging articlesMerging articles not be bundled with this nomination. I am aware that bundling was not suggested. Whatever the outcome here, I am hoping it is a "clean" decision so that the next editor who looks at this in 5, 10, or 20 years won't have to spend as much time as I did trying to make sense of it. These two redirects have many similar issues but the history of the particular redirect tat is nominated may or may not be decisive. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 00:36, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

  I've created the first one as it seems potentially useful for searches. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete – Per Deacon Vorbis FaviFake (talk) 15:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
• Note: Page merge was deleted in 2021 per: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 5#Page merge. I'm not sure how old it was at the time but per the RFD it had a similar history, having first been a redirect to Wikipedia:Proposed mergers and then to Merge at the time of deletion. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 22:33, 15 June 2026 (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).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 11:03, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

• Toronto Pearson Vicount Station → Toronto Pearson Viscount station  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a very likely nor frequent misspelling; unlikely to be really helpful. OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 08:13, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: The target was merged and redirected to Terminal Link by the nominator before this had a chance to be updated. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:47, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Speedy delete, G6, unambiguously created in error, moved 5 minutes after creation. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:47, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete, unlikely search term given the "Toronto Pearson" prefix. Vicount station on its own would be a more useful redirect. BLAIXX 14:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:05, 15 June 2026 (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).

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. Noting that the pre-redirect revision appears to have been speedyable under CSD A2 (cf. hy:Օրչատա). Go figure, that the rare time an A2 would actually be correct, it didn't get used! -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 16:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

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

Armenian transliteration of Spanish-language term; subject has zero connection to Armenia or Armenians. Delete per WP:R#DELETE, criterion 8. ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:34, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, WP:FORRED. —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 04:08, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-redirect page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:59, 14 June 2026 (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).

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, histmerging old revisions to Jimon, the title at which they were originally made. (Викидим correctly notes that the histmerge part isn't required, but at the same time, it's perfectly allowed, and many admins prefer to not delete valid old revisions when we can help it.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 16:30, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Jimon (building) → Jimon and Sanmon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Please delete as I created it by mistake. Yiba (talk | contribs) 05:05, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• The nom has created a bit of a mess here by moving Jimon to Jimon (building) and then creating a WP:MALPLACED disambiguation page at Jimon (disambiguation)Jimon (disambiguation). I think this can be cleaned up by WP:HISTMERGING the pre-2026 edits at Jimon (building) into the disambiguation page, leaving the new title deleted, and moving the disambiguation page to the base title. - Eureka Lott 15:40, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

  There is no history in this page worth the effort of preserving. Delete as a mis-redirect. Викидим (talk) 00:00, 15 June 2026 (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).

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 Television in Greece. I find no consensus to delete the lowercase variant. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:30, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

• Greek TVGreek TV → Greek (TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Greek tvGreek tv → Greek (TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

May refer to Television in Greece. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:39, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Bundled in Greek tvGreek tv as well. J947 ‡ ^edits 01:32, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
• We should have a disambiguation page with Greek (TV series), Television in Greece and List of Greek-language television channels, plus New Greek TV, Hellenic TV and List of Greek television series as see also (maybe National Broadcasting Television (Greece) too, but I'm unsure on that). However I'm torn as to whether the disambig or Television in Greece should be primary? Thryduulf (talk) 02:00, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:37, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete lower case tv as incorrect casing, not needed for searching. Retarget upper case TV to Television in Greece as a fairly plain reading and plausible search term. Oppose disambiguation as nothing else suggested could reasonably be titled "Greek TV". The closest you get would be the list of channels, but that would only sit in a see-also section, which is where I'd expect to find it linked from the main topic as well. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete doesn't seem useful given it is ambiguous and retargeting doesn't seem useful as I don't see why you would search putting "TV" after "Greek" if you want the generic meaning. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

  I don't see why you would search putting "TV" after "Greek" if you want the generic meaning. I don't understand this? British TV, American TV, German TV, Canadian TV, French TV, Japanese TV (and probably others) are established redirects and all seem very plausible to me. Thryduulf (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

  OK fair point then at least I'd retarget the capitalized one to Television in Greece. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• The current target is incredibly confusing. So change target per nom. While at it, the second one can be deleted (or not) depending on the mood of the closer (it is not useful, not harmful, thus no need to burn any additional brain cycles on it). --Викидим (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom and others. No need to delete greek tv, which was the redirect title for ~15 years, and an all lowercase title is perfectly fine as a redirect now as well. Jay 05:09, 28 June 2026 (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).

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. No prejudice against renominating Pusher Lover GirlPusher Lover Girl and Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake Song)Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake Song) individually to discuss the merits of keeping or deleting these based on their particular problems. (non-admin closure) —Myceteae‍🌈 (talk) 07:12, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• Pusher Lover GirlPusher Lover Girl → Pusher Love Girl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pusher Love Girl (song)Pusher Love Girl (song) → Pusher Love Girl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake song)Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake song) → Pusher Love Girl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake Song)Pusher Love Girl (Justin Timberlake Song) → Pusher Love Girl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No need for the old redirects with misspellings and disambiguators. RedShellMomentum 03:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep all. Pascuet (talk) 04:07, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep the second and third as standard {{r from unnecessary disambiguation}}. I don't have strong opinions about the other two. jlwoodwa (talk) 23:36, 14 June 2026 (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).