Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 29

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

March 29

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 29, 2026.

K. B. Hedgewar redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 10#K. B. Hedgewar redirects

Operation Epstein Fury

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 Reactions to the 2026 Iran war#Operation Epstein Fury. This target gained a majority of supports after it was proposed, and addresses many of the substantive issues raised by the keep/delete voters before it was suggested. Rusalkii (talk) 20:59, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Not mentioned, let alone described, at the target, 2026_Iran_war#Politicians. “Epstein”, in “Epstein files” is mentioned only once, and the connection of the 2026 Iran War to “Operation Epstein Fury”, while probably a fair satirical critique of the underlying motivations, is not encyclopedic, but is attempting to be clever rhetoric. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:34, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete per nomination. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, not encyclopedic at all Ahammed Saad (talk) 10:21, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. Redirects are cheap and, on cursory Googling, this seems to be a fairly broad hashtag already covered across several news articles. If the article doesn't currently mention the massive criticism of Trump's attack as a wag-the-dog situation distracting from Massie & co's work in Congress, it should be added. The only issue might be that other articles on Epstein and Trump might be better targets for the redirect than the main Iraq War article, but that depends on their coverage and quality. — LlywelynII 13:07, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep: This redirect has already got over 600 views in the fairly short time it has existed, so I don't think deleting it would be a sensible idea even if you don't think it's "encyclopedic" (we have lots of non-neutral redirects anyway, and many of them are a lot more obscure than this one). —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 14:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
    Comment: I am a new editor on Wikipedia, but using view count as a primary/significant argument for promoting specific wording feels contrary to the ideal of building an encyclopedia, and indeed downright dangerous towards that goal. Sensationalist things will always win the view count battle, resulting in a serious problem of prejudicial effect outweighing probative value. It's my understanding the Wikipedia aims to prioritize the latter.
    TL;DR are we building a clickbait website here? Beeswax1999 (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    Nobody's trying to rename the article to Operation Epstein Fury, this is just a redirect. The high view count shows that it's a plausible search term, and one of the main purposes of redirects is to make it easier to search for stuff. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 10:23, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    As mentioned RDs need not be neutral or encyclopedic at all as long as they are possible search terms (where view count is an astute measure) we are good to go. Gotitbro (talk) 10:58, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep, per above. And probably Operation Epstein Files should be created as well Yacàwotçã (talk) 14:50, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, obviously not encyclopedic DiodotusNicator (talk) 19:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep and refine to 2026 Iran war#Hostilities, where Operation Epic Fury is mentioned. One of the purposes of redirects is to direct non-neutral titles to neutral ones; we have Trump-Epstein files → Epstein files, for example. I2Overcome talk 22:39, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep Whether satirical or not it is a likely search term. If target mention is a problem, satirical names are detailed at reactions to the 2026 Iran war and that maybe a more apt target. Gotitbro (talk) 10:55, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to appropriate location in Reactions to the 2026 Iran war — mentioned here but not at current target. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:41, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    Support this retarget to Reactions_to_the_2026_Iran_war. The phrase is mentioned and explained there:

    Other critics of Trump, including Democratic politicians, social media influencers and users, referred to the war with satirical names to allege that the war aims to distract Americans from investigations into Trump's past with the financier and child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in the Epstein files like the "Epstein War" and "Operation Epstein Fury" (or "Operation Epstein's Fury"), the latter being a reference to the operation codename "Operation Epic Fury".

    . The phase remains unused and unexplained at the current target.
    - SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    Prefer Relationship of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein#Commentary per Scyrme below. That section explains the term in the lede sentence

    During the 2026 Iran war, critics of Trump mocked him by nicknaming the war the "Operation Epstein Distraction" or "Operation Epstein Fury" (in reference to the codename Operation Epic Fury), alleging that it was launched to distract from the Trump–Epstein relationship.[183]

    making it a much better target. -SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep Plausible search term. Not opposed to shifting the target to the reaction article. BSMRD (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Relationship of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein § Commentary. It's also mentioned at this target, and the article overall provides the relevant context as to why this name exists to begin with. While it's also mentioned at Reactions to the 2026 Iran war, that mention is buried deep down within the "United States" section so is more likely to surprise (WP:RSUPRISE). Oppose keeping it as the current target doesn't mention it or provide context. – Scyrme (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Tol and SmokeyJoe: Would you also prefer this target, or do you have a reason for preferring the Reactions article? – Scyrme (talk) 22:51, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    If there are multiple places that describe the phrase, then either use disambiguation, or simply delete and allow the Wikipedia search engine to serve its purpose. Oppose the current targeting. Oppose a redirect that hides one target by sending readers to the other. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:38, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    @Scyrme: I still have a slight preference for the reactions article. It seems to me that the term is more closely associated with and in direct response to the war rather than the Trump–Epstein relationship, and the reactions page links to the relationship page to provide more context. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 23:42, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
    Retarget to the reactions article per Tol. I agree it's more closely related to that topic and that would be the less surprising place to end up from a search. To avoid the concern mentioned by Scyrme, we could add an anchor link on the appropriate paragraph to link directly there. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 00:34, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
    Anchor is a good suggestion. I'd be fine with that target as an {{r to anchor}}. – Scyrme (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2026 (UTC)
    Also agree with anchor. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:31, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
    Oppose retarget as the many other editors already effectively did above. The redirect is pointing to the subject many people are searching for as already attested by multiple reliable sources. Something similar to what's currently at the Epstein/Trump article could work with the Iran War hatnoted in the section, but the section needs to be something stable and specifically Iran focused. "Commentary" is an incredibly bland name that is either going to get removed, reworded, or refocused onto other commentary on other aspects of the Trump/Epstein relationship. Meanwhile, the Iran War is sitting right there and is already what wp:readers are looking for, such that not using it is actually violating wp:rsurprise. Alternatively, if it's phrased correctly and stable enough, Reactions to the 2026 Iran war is the far more natural and neutral retarget, if people only want to focus on the redirect as a vibe as opposed to an alt name for the actual war. — LlywelynII 10:37, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:10, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Reactions to the 2026 Iran war#Operation Epstein Fury where I have added a visible anchor. Alternatively, a regular anchor could be moved to the beginning of the relevant paragraph. I agree that Reactions to the 2026 Iran war is the most appropriate target. "Operation Epstein Fury" is a non-neutral name for the war itself. Targeting this to the article about the war, and specifically to the place where the name is described, provides the correct association. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
    Support retargeting to anchor. The cited sources show that the term at least warrants a mention. Loytra✨ 11:38, 23 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Strongest possible keep: not only are non-neutral redirects allowed on Wikipedia, they have their own category. This term is quite common among opponents of the war and is used even by politicians. It is therefore a plausible search term. The case for deletion is more or less baseless. As for being mentioned in the target, that is not strictly necessary, but in this case, the answer to that would be to write it up in the target with reliable sources, not delete it. 〜 Festucalex • talk 04:22, 26 March 2026 (UTC)
    If it is a plausible search term, this is a reason to delete and allow the search engine to give the multiple hits.
    Being mentioned at the target is strictly required.
    It is mentioned at two targets,
    1=Relationship of Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein
    2=Reactions to the 2026 Iran war
    For a strongest possible !vote, you haven’t addressed the question.
    - SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
    Being mentioned at the target is strictly required: that is completely false. J947 ‡ edits 02:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
    Since when? SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:40, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
    This relates to WP:R delete reason 8, and an explanatory statement later Most (but not all) "inbound redirects" other than misspellings or other obvious close variants of the article title should be mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs of the article or section to which the redirect goes. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
    Does that sound like a strict requirement to you? The rule at WP:RFD#DELETE #8 is to consider deletion if it's not mentioned at the target and it's "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name". Redirects should not be deleted if the connection to the subject is obvious to most people, or if the redirect is correct but not appropriate for inclusion in the article, such as {{R from brand name}}. . J947 ‡ edits 01:30, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
    It does, although I’ll stop using the word “strict”, but it was not “completely” false.
    ”Operation Epstein Fury” is a recent neologism, and it is not mentioned at the current target. For this reason, the redirect should be deleted (to allow the search engine to work) or retargeted. This arguing “keep”, including User:Festucalex to who. I replied, as well as User:BSMRD, are using illogical arguments, perhaps they mean, like others imply, “keep but retarget to where it is mentioned”. Some, like User talk:LlywelynII, explicitly !vote “oppose retarget” and then argue for retargeting. I think the “keep” !voters should review the options that have developed.
    SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:35, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
    I see that
    has only continued to firm as the most popular !vote. If this is the outcome, I suggest reducing the mention at Retarget #1, and merging and pointing to Retarget #2. I note that it continues to be used, and increasingly. SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:15, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:40, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Reactions to the 2026 Iran war#Operation Epstein Fury. I searched around trying to figure out what Operation Epstein Fury is. (Wow. Didn't think I had to search far. There should've been an explanation for the term at the current target.) There's probably only one question that comes from searching this term:

1. What is Operation Epstein Fury?

There are many subquestions, like what happened and what type of event it is, but they all fall inside this one question. The current target does not answer the question. Without context, I would've guessed that Operation Epstein Fury was a vote to end the 2026 Iran War since that's what the section is describing. This is already confusing as a native English speaker, and it gets even more difficult to understand for non-native English speakers. The proposed retarget to the reactions does answer the question. The relationship article also answers the question, but the reactions article provides more context and more information. Operation Epstein Fury is a reference to the operation codename "Operation Epic Fury". Now knowing that the two are synonymous (which I wouldn't know without this information, since I find it hard to connect Epstein and Epic without context), all that's needed to answer other possible questions like what happened is a link to the operation, which isn't there yet but should be added. Mathguy2718 (talk) 03:30, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
Same applies to Operation Epstein's Fury. Mathguy2718 (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep/Retarget to Reactions to the 2026 Iran war#Operation Epstein Fury. Redirects do not have to be neutral. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 10:44, 1 April 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).

Vernon Martin

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. (non-admin closure) thejiujiangdragon talk 23:02, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Although this redirect was created from a page move, it is likely to be confused with Vernon Martin (jazz bassist). Perhaps it should be made into a disambiguation page that also includes Martin Vernon and Vernon Martinus? Uffda608 (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

  • Disambiguate is the right answer. BD2412 T 21:04, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
  • It depends.
    • If the football player's article should truly be at "Vern Martin" (I had trouble getting a good answer due to inability to access most of the sources), then the bassist should be moved to the base title of "Vernon Martin" and hatnotes would suffice.
    • If on the other hand, the football player should be at "Vernon Martin"
      • and one is primary among the two, then that article should be moved to the base title, and hatnotes will suffice.
      • and neither is primary, then there should be a dab page at the base title consisting of exactly those two entries and nothing else. Neither of the other articles mentioned in the nomination are the same name and shouldn't be listed in this case.
  • –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:36, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 03:50, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment: I agree with Deacon Vorbis's suggested approach. It's not readily apparent to me that there is a primary topic. A Google search turns up several unrelated, probably non-notable Vernon Martins, including a recent news story (that probably gets an artificial boost as he is in the news now) and two deceased individuals. A quick scan of the first page of JSTOR results was no help. Neither page has a significant pageviews advantage. (Note that the page move occurred Feb 21, 2026 so past pageviews for "Vernon Martin" are for the article that now lives at "Vern Martin"). Absent evidence of a primary topic, a dab page would seem to make sense. On the other hand, Vern Martin lived at the base name until very recently, apparently without controversy. Per Special:WhatLinksHere/Vernon_Martin&namespace=0&limit=100, there are 80 links to Vernon Martin in article space but when I spot checked several of these, I could not actually locate the link in most of the articles listed. Not sure if this is user error or if the "What Links Her" is out of date. The links I could confirm clearly refer to Vern Martin the football player. Changing the target could be quite disruptive and would require review and possible updating of the links in articles. That would seem to argue for maintaining the status quo. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:20, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No primary topic, so what should be done?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ edits 23:58, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:37, 29 March 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).

(Re)Connect

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:01, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

This is an {{R without mention}} that I think should probably be deleted. I'm not entirely sure, but (Re)Connect appears to have been an early working title for Family Reboot, which is listed under List of Disney+ original programming#Reality. There was some reporting about the then-upcoming show (Re)Connect in 2019, including the sources used at Disney+#Original unscripted content, where this redirect link is used. Family Reboot eventually premiered in 2022 and the description is similar to earlier descriptions of (Re)Connect. Readers who search this or click the link will be WP:RSURPRISEd to land at a list that does not include this show. I don't know if Family Reboot is notable but it doesn't have an article and I've found no suitable place where content might be added to explain its development history—assuming (Re)Connect was a working title, which would need to be verified if such content were added to support this redirect. There is a song called "[re]connect" mentioned at Mother (Veil of Maya album)#Track listing; I don't think that's a suitable target. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the possible target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:25, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Nominator update and clarification: I removed the mention of (Re)Connect from Disney+#Original unscripted content. It erroneously stated that the show aired on Disney+ but as far as I can tell no show with that title was ever aired. I've not found a source that says (Re)Connect was a working title for Family Reboot; only sources from 2019 saying (Re)Connect was in development and then later articles form circa 2022 describing a show called Family Reboot with the same producers, premise, and also on Disney+. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
    FYI @Jay. I realize I should have removed the (Re)Connect content from Disney+#Original unscripted content as soon as I realized it was incorrect. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
    Struck. I was surprised too why you didn't see it as a natural retarget. Jay 💬 20:33, 2 April 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).

Central offfice code

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 as G7 per below. Left guide (talk) 06:10, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Implausible typo (office with 3 F's). Would qualify for WP:R3 but it's old. — W.andrea (talk) 22:11, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Delete. I created the correctly spelled version at the same time, so probably just forgot to clean up afterwards. Mindmatrix 22:56, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
    Tagged as G7, based on this response. W.andrea isn't wrong about this being old. 21 April 2008. Wow! Chess enjoyer (talk) 23:03, 29 March 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).

Losercore

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Unmentioned at target. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

This is also a term in the community specifically for the strain of acts who emerged in the wake of Wifiskeleton's death, but this also currently has no good RS Aradicus77 (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
No rs say it. So we do not say it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete. The term appears mostly in unreliable sources and does not appear well-defined. There is a song called "Losercore" that receives passing mentions in a few articles, none of which are suitable targets. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:57, 3 April 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).

E-punk

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Unmentioned at target. Was previously listed in "related topics" - as an unsourced target that just redirected there. Unclear. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Someone was trying to add E-Punk as an aka to incelcore. There is currently no RS for this, but in the community E-Punk is generally an AKA term but also evolved into a wide umbrella. This is why the redirect was created Aradicus77 (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
No rs say it. So we do not say it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete unmentioned, poorly defined term. Some "in the know" readers will already make the association but, as the redirect creator state above, the meaning has evolved into a wide umbrella. This redirect would need to be supported by a well-sourced description and definition as a synonym, related genre, off-shoot, or whatever. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:02, 3 April 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).

899 area code

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 withdrawn or procedural closure as the nominator already performed the edit and tried to remove the whole section. (non-admin closure) George Ho (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

899 is not covered on the target page. — W.andrea (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Retargeted to List of North American Numbering Plan area codes § 899. For reference, this is an expansion code, not a toll-free code. — W.andrea (talk) 19:16, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

As I see, you removed the RFD tag. Does this mean you want to withdraw this listing or something? George Ho (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Oh, I clicked the "Closure: retarget" button and I thought that would do it for me. Yeah, we could withdraw or close this or whatever. It doesn't matter to me :) — W.andrea (talk) 19:27, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
I (re)inserted the fresher RFD tag and let this RFD discussion sit out for a while, but.... I'll take your latest comment as your "withdraw" vote then. George Ho (talk) 19:55, 29 March 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).

59th

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 moved. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:55, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Given the numerous meanings of "59th" (and even just the numerous military units) listed at 59th (disambiguation), I can't see why this particular Quartermaster Company would be the primary topic for "59th". I would move 59th (disambiguation) to this title. BD2412 T 17:17, 29 March 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).

Third Gulf War

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Third Gulf War

Bunonematoidea

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Bunonematoidea

Software life cycle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Software life cycle

Jean Val Jean (actor)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Jean Val Jean (actor)

LENS

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 Lens (disambiguation) per WP:BARTENDER. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:52, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Originally a redirect to European Laboratory for Non-Linear Spectroscopy. Lens (disambiguation) also mentions Laser engineered net shaping (though the article only uses the initialism in a link). Probably retarget to the dab page (per WP:DIFFCAPS)? 1234qwer1234qwer4 04:06, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

  • It needs to redirect to Lens (disambiguation), which I'll do right away. This page was overlooked when the dab page was moved in 2019. It was always supposed to redirect to the dab page.--Srleffler (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
    @Srleffler please do not change the targets of redirects while they are being discussed here. It only leads to confusion (e.g. does someone recommending "keep" believe it should have the target it did when nominated or the target it has after it was changed?) and thus reduces the chances of a consensus. I've undone your change to reduce the likelihood of issues. Thryduulf (talk) 15:15, 1 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to European Laboratory for Non-Linear Spectroscopy or the DAB, it makes no sense to have the current target which doesn't seem to be known in all caps. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to European Laboratory for Non-Linear Spectroscopy with a {{Redirect}} hatnote to the disambiguation page for other uses. Laser Engineered Net Shaping seems unlikely to be the primary topic for the acronym when it's not even the common name for the topic it refers to. – Scyrme (talk) 00:21, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Lens (disambiguation). The redirect points to Lens because that used to be the location of the dab page. When the dab page was moved to allow the article to use that title the redirect was mistakenly not updated. --Srleffler (talk) 04:37, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
This does not address the question whether it should point at the disambiguation page. 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:32, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no consensus of which target yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Servite et contribuere (talk) 09:54, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to European.... There are only two acronyms at the dab page -- this or laser metal shaping. That gets a good sight more page views, but it's very unlikely that people are getting there are associating "LENS" with it, which as noted, seems to be a little-used trade name. A hatnote to either it or the dab page would suffice to catch anything else. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Lens (disambiguation). One of the acronyms is non-English, and having it retarget there might be a WP:SURPRISE. ~2026-16755-69 (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't see why it would surprise, given it's already mentioned in the lead paragraph in bold just as is suggested by WP:RSUPRISE. – Scyrme (talk) 22:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC)
Table of terms with the acronym LENS
LENSNumber of uses (+ main article)Pages that use LENS
European Laboratory for Non-Linear Spectroscopy 3 (+1)
Laser engineered net shaping (redirect to Laser metal deposition) 2 (+1)
Low Energy Neutron Source 1
Large Energy National Shock (tunnels) 1
LUT School of Engineering Science 1
Law Enforcement Negotiation Support 1
Leadership Excellence Networks 1
Law, Ethics and National Security 1
RKSV Lenig en Snel 1
Low Energy Neurofeedback System —N/a Note: in broken section link from Stephen Larsen, previously mentioned at Neurofeedback
(Stock symbol, not acronym) —N/a Concord Camera
There are several possible interpretations of the acronym that I found, and no acronym is overwhelmingly used more than the others, which is part of what would establish a primary topic per WP:PT1. Therefore, retargeting to the disambiguation page is more fitting. I believe that some (though not all) should be added to Lens (disambiguation). Mathguy2718 (talk) 03:07, 28 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a clear consensus to retarget but no consensus on whether European Laboratory for Non-Linear Spectroscopy or Lens (disambiguation) is the better target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 12:22, 29 March 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).

Subjugate

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Subjugate

Survivor: Panama-only contestants

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 Survivor: Panama. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:29, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

All of the above appeared in only Survivor: Panama season and haven't reappeared in later Survivor seasons. --George Ho (talk) 08:05, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Retarget all per nom and similar nominations recently. I didn't do an in-depth review on each of these but I trust that the nom has done so. When a contestant appears on just one season, it makes sense to target there rather than the list for the entire franchise. The Survivor season article will contain the most relevant detail. As has been suggested in a previous listing, these seem uncontroversial and could have been boldly retargeted without discussion here. None of these have extensive edit histories of back-and-forth. If Survivor contestant redirects have been controversial in the past, or if there is reason to suspect these would be controversial, it would help to have that information presented in the nomination. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:15, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
    @George Ho, see my comment re: boldly retargeting. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:18, 31 March 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).

People's Republic of Santa Monica

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#People's Republic of Santa Monica

Discovery Networks International

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#Discovery Networks International

Disney XD/Jr. international broadcasting

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Plucked out from my mass-nominated "TheMaxChannel528-24-created titles" RFD nomination and re-nominated them again because of trainwreck issues. These were created by blocked sockpuppet TheMaxChannel528-24 and as to why these aren't deleted as G5 is shocking as it serves no purpose. Their current target titles already explain the pages' contents in detail. Intrisit (talk) 09:41, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ edits 07:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • These were not applicable for G5. But the page moves were unconstructive as a page move discussion was in progress and mover didn't wait for it to complete. Fine with deletion. Jay 💬 13:53, 5 April 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).

Survivor: Guatemala-only contestants

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 Survivor: Guatemala. WP:BOLDLY retargeting as an unopposed nomination. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:37, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

All of the above appeared in only Survivor: Guatemala and haven't reappeared in later Survivor seasons since. Should be retargeted as such. --George Ho (talk) 06:45, 29 March 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).

Survivor: Palau-only contestants

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 Survivor: Palau. WP:BOLDLY retargeting as an unopposed nomination. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:39, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

All of the above appeared in only Survivor: Palau and haven't reappeared in later Survivor seasons since. --George Ho (talk) 05:37, 29 March 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).

Twila Tanner

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 keep per WP:SK#1. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Appeared in not only Survivor: Vanuatu but also an episode of Fear Factor against Jonny Fairplay. Nonetheless, per WP:RASTONISH, should be retargeted to the Vanuatu season as she hasn't reappeared in later Survivor seasons. George Ho (talk) 05:10, 29 March 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).

Caramel macchiato

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

2007-era "Merge" that was instead implemented as a BLAR; no information was added to the new target article, and indeed, to this day this is unmentioned at target article-- CTRL-F "Caramel", you won't find anything. I'll also note that A: the 2007-era article that was BLAR'd in the first place was a single sentence stub, and B: there's a probable WP:XY issue with Caffe macchiato. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 05:08, 29 March 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).

Julie Berry (Survivor contestant)

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 keep per WP:SK#1. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Intended initially to add this as part of multi-nom listing, but I can think about her also as Jeff Probst's then-girlfriend. Should be redirected to either Survivor: Vanuatu, Survivor: Vanuatu#Contestants, or Jeff Probst#Personal life. George Ho (talk) 04:39, 29 March 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).

Denver Diva (Survivor)

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 keep per WP:SK#1. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:46, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

This refers to Ghandia Johnson of Survivor: Thailand. Found this page just now. Thought about listing it as part of multi-nom, but unsure whether it abides to WP:BLP, especially since she is still a living person. Well, she originated from Denver, yet unsure whether "Diva" is necessary. Had "Denver Diva" been used at least once in the season?

Regardless, if kept, then the page should be retargeted to Survivor: Thailand (or Survivor: Thailand#Contestants. George Ho (talk) 04:14, 29 March 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).

List of Survivor: Gabon Contestants

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 keep per WP:SK1. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:45, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Should be redirected to Survivor: Gabon (or Survivor:Gabon#Contestants). 'Nuff said. George Ho (talk) 04:04, 29 March 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).

Survivor: Vanuatu-only contestants

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 Survivor:Vanuatu. WP:BOLDLY retargeting as an unopposed nomination. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:43, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

All of the above appeared in only Survivor: Vanuatu, haven't reappeared in later Survivor seasons, and should be retargeted accordingly. George Ho (talk) 03:57, 29 March 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).

John Palyok

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 5#John Palyok

Obamna

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 nicknames used by Donald Trump#Obamna. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:44, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Primary topic should be the listing at List of nicknames used by Donald Trump. Not unilaterally redirecting since this is a fairly popular redirect Mach61 04:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

  • N.b., That listing appears to fail the list's inclusion criteria. See Talk:List of nicknames used by Donald Trump#obamna. From my knowledge of the "nickname", it's a meme favorite, but probably doesn't meet any of the four criteria (and entries are supposed to meet all four). --BDD (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
    If it gets removed from that list I suppose it can stay as is, but currently its still on there Mach61 21:01, 12 March 2026 (UTC)
Just don’t delete it pla Idibiks (talk) 17:33, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
Keep per WP:CHEAP. It's useful for someone. guninvalid (talk) 07:47, 20 March 2026 (UTC)
@Guninvalid Not advocating for deletion Mach61 22:53, 26 March 2026 (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! 00:15, 22 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to List of nicknames used by Donald Trump, as long as it's mentioned there (whether it should be mentioned on that page is a discussion for another time). Most people who search "Obamna" are probably looking for the Trump nickname, not information on Obama himself. If "Obamna" is ever removed from the list of nicknames, then Barack Obama is indeed the most suitabe target. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 10:40, 1 April 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).

Post-industrial (music genre)

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 Post-industrial (music genre) to Industrial music#Post-industrial; keep Post-industrial (music). voorts (talk/contributions) 19:41, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

This redirect targets List of industrial music genres, however Post-industrial (music) targets the more general Industrial music. Both target pages have sections which discuss Post-industrial music. Given how similar the titles of these redirects are, I think they should target the same section. However, it is unclear to me which target is preferable. Uffda608 (talk) 10:01, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:21, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Post industrial music also redirects to List of industrial music genres#Post-industrial developments.
Post-industrial music also redirects to Industrial music#Post-industrial.
Slight preference to redirecting them all to Industrial music#Post-industrial which follows the pattern of Dark electro and Aggrotech, also listed on the music genres list. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 12:05, 1 April 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).

Walt Disney Japan

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:39, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Pinging LTPHarry who created this on 22 September 2020. Like, since when has this rdr been thought of, especially when currently un-notable Dlife currently redirects to Disney Channel (International)?! Intrisit (talk) 15:38, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Keep: Walt Disney Japan is the theatrical and home entertainment division of The Walt Disney Company Japan. It used to be called Walt Disney Studios Japan. Sure, it’s a confusing name, but it doesn’t have any connection to DLife, which is operated by TWDCJ itself. Luigitehplumber (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:33, 14 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 22:48, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chess enjoyer (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable for distributing Ghibli films' home media releases among others and is sufficient for a redirect. Go D. Usopp (talk) 14:28, 29 March 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).

Template.2024–25 in Northen Cypriot football

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 💬 14:00, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

All of these are unwanted mainspace redirects to templates. All look to be created in error as one minute after the initial creation, the template was moved to the correct spelling in template namespace. Mathguy2718 (talk) 02:40, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

  • Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 21:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 12:12, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Delete - pointless redirects, original would never be searched for. GiantSnowman 18:08, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
  • delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 07:38, 3 April 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).

Arlington, USA

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 Arlington#United States. This is an avalanche. (non-admin closure) Chess enjoyer (talk) 02:39, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

Can also refer to Arlington, Texas, need disambiguate A1Cafel (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Retarget to Arlington#United States, where this is already disambiguated. NerdyEpiscopalian (talk) 02:43, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to the disambiguation. Traffic report shows similar daily average views for both Virginia and Texas. Doesn't seem either is the primary topic. – Scyrme (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Retarget to Arlington#United States per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:16, 30 March 2026 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Arlington#United States per those above. Funny story, as an IP attorney I once represented one of the Arlingtons in a dispute with the others over the use of the name in a festival. I learned quite a bit about the history of distribution of the name. BD2412 T 00:37, 30 March 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).

HEIL HITLER

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. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:39, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Typing "HEIL HITLER" in all caps into the search bar without this redirect will still take you to the redirect Heil Hitler, which takes you to Nazi salute. I don't think this redirect is needed. Higstudios3333 (talk) 00:30, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

For context: I created this as a redirect to the Kanye West song in June 2025 since it was stylized in all caps. Another user, in October 2025, retargeted this to Nazi salute#Nazi chants since they seemingly share the same name. This should probably either be retargeted back to the Kanye song or deleted (no opinion). RedShellMomentum 00:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Well I still don't think it is needed because someone might type "HEIL HITLER" to get to the Nazi salute article. Higstudios3333 (talk) 00:58, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
And the Kanye West song is referred to in the article the redirect points to. Higstudios3333 (talk) 00:59, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 12:11, 1 April 2026 (UTC)
  • delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 07:38, 3 April 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. The phrase is indeed often rendered in all caps, and the primary topic for the all-caps version is the same as for the sentence-case version. There may be some very marginal benefit to readers accessing pages by direct title match rather than the search bar or a search engine. Falls in the category of "not worth creating, not worth deleting". -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 14:01, 3 April 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).