Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 8

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 Africa (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:00, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Creator of the redirect created it "[because] it appears in many European languages", namely Spanish and Portuguese. I would DABify this since many pages contain this exact term, including but not limited to África (film), África Brasil, and África (given name). 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 23:42, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• support dab per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Disambiguation draft requested Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:29, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Disambig per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 00:38, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to Africa (disambiguation) where the accented version is already covered. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:20, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

  Makes sense to me; so I think it should be retargeted there as well. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:35, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget to Africa (disambiguation) per Tavix. I don't see the need for a separate DAB page for the accented version. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:53, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to existing DAB per WP:DABCOMBINE given the uses like África (film) and África (given name). Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:02, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget to existing dab page Africa (disambiguation) per Tavix and others. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
• comment I'm also fine with the retarget proposal --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:20, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

retarget to Africa disambig page which is adequate in coverage of the África term, obviously several countries are of Lusophone Africa, so Portuguese terminology is relevant. BarntToust 01:45, 14 May 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 Model 9000Model 9000 to 9000; delete the rest. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:53, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Bullshit Forever Gun → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Big Fun Gun → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Big Fat Gun → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Blast Field Gun → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Blast Field Generator → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• BFRed → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• BFGreen → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• LFG-2000 → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• The Nefarious BFG → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Nefarious BFG → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Model 9000Model 9000 → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• SKAG 1337 → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Super Kick-Ass Gun leet → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• BMFG → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Big Mother Fucking Gun → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• BMF Thunderstrike → Doom (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

seems to have been a mix of joke names the creator found on the internet or made up, poor attempts at censoring, references i'm missing, and one completely unrelated weapon from a duke nukem game. not even worth retargeting to bfg (weapon), since this might as well be a pile of stuff to g3 together consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:32, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

• Retarget Model 9000 to the disambigation page at 9000, since it can refer to several items listed there. - Eureka Lott 16:11, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
• Delete all as unlikely and unhelpful redirects. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:36, 25 April 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget "Model 9000" to the disambiguation page 9000 per EurekaLott -- ~2026-25149-07 (talk) 22:31, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ ^edits 23:05, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all per nom, and oppose retargeting Model 9000Model 9000 to 9000. The problem with retargeting Model 9000 to 9000 is that "Model 9000" is a partial title match that does not encompass all of the subjects listed at 9000. If need be, convert Model 9000 to a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 17:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
  • Model 9000 would be a {{r from incomplete disambiguation}}, not a WP:PTM, and there's no requirement for those to match every item on the disambiguation page. - Eureka Lott 20:51, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

    An {{R from incomplete disambiguation}} would require that the title have an actual disambiguator in (parentheses) in it; I think you meant {{R from ambiguous name}}? Either way, it technically is a WP:PTM in either direction since it is either an extra word (Model 9000) or missing a word (9000) compared to the other respective title when neither title has a disambiguator in (parentheses). Quite frankly, it would be simpler if this distinction did not have to exist; it would make things similar to dissect. Steel1943 (talk) 03:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete all as unhelpful and unlikely. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:54, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget Big Mother Fucking Gun and BMFG to BFG (weapon) as reasonable synonyms; Retarget Blast Field Generator there as well as a common (potential) misnomer. Retarget The Nefarious BFG and Nefarious BFG as (currently) {{r without mention}}s to Ratchet & Clank: Up Your Arsenal; Retarget BMF Thunderstrike to Duke Nukem: Zero Hour in the same vein. No prejudice against listing them separately in the future. Neutral on the rest. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:34, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
• Comment - BFRed and BFGreen appear to be related to FreeSpace 2, but are not mentioned in the article (and likely do not seem to have enough relevance to remain). — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:34, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Kind of looking like a trainwreck
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:06, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment I would support Model 9000 to be removed from this RfD and discussed separately, as that appears to be a sticking point for several people. While I also believe it should be deleted, it is clearly preventing consensus from being reached. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:55, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete all but Model 9000, retarget that as proposed. I'm unconvinced by the arguments for salvaging the others, but I agree multiple topics at 9000] could be referred to as "Model 9000". --BDD (talk) 14:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
• Retarget Model 9000 to 9000 per the above. Retarget any that Godsy singled out to BFG (weapon), along with any that have the "BFG" initialism which are plausible due to euphemization. These have the wrong target due to this redirection being reverted, so the fix is to retarget them back to the correct target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:58, 23 May 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. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Joni LopezJoni Lopez → Jony López  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No evidence that this person's name is spelled as "Joni Lopez" instead of "Jony Lopez". Other people with this name include a possibly-notable Guatemalan footballer (with a different birthdate), the bride in a non-notable Jamaican (?) wedding couple, and a non-notable American counselor. Duckmather (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep for now; until an article is written about the possibly notable Guatemalan footballer, then this should continue targeting Jony, as it is a clear example of a phonetic misspelling (see also the missing diacritic) considering he'd be the only notable Jony/Joni Lopez. If or when the Guatemalan's article is written, a Distinguish template can be added on each's respective page targeting the other. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 21:50, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• (edit conflict) Keep, evidence includes and his name is spelled as Joni at List of Spanish football transfers summer 2009. An obviously non-notable bride & counselor are irrelevant, there is zero possibility of them being mentioned on Wikipedia. By the way, this is marked as {{R from title without diacritics}} which means Joni López exists and should be bundled. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:55, 8 May 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 💬 22:24, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

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

Like the recently deleted CAt, this isn't implausible, but not direly needed. 218 total views since July 2015, a negligible number compared to its target; DELete 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:29, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete per nom. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:58, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Alas, young redirect, being cut down just short of its 21st birthday. I don't remember why I created this; possibly a typoed redlink at the time. But I agree it is not needed. --Delirium (talk) 02:29, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

It's nice to see that a user whose account was created in 2003 is still active to this day; thank you for your great contributions to Wikipedia, @Delirium! 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 11:08, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

• DElete it could probably be speedily deleted give the only other contribution was tagging it with "R from other capitalisation" but given it was created nearly 21 years ago I'm fine with just letting it go through full discussion. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete The search engine detects such typos and offers the correct result, so the redirect is redundant. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:03, 15 May 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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 22:29, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Sophia of Sicily → Sophia (given name)#Saints  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Sophia of Sortino → Sophia (given name)#Saints  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The current target does not mention this Sicilian Sophia, who has articles in other wikis, such as Italian and Russian. Delete both per WP:RETURNTORED; I hope this can be done speedily as I want to translate the Italian article into English WP and title it "Sophia of Sicily" as soon as possible. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:00, 8 May 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 💬 22:34, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Continuity paradox → Chicken or the egg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Not defined in the article, or anywhere else on en-wiki. The sole use in articles seems to refer to continuity errors. The term is rather uncommon with just 9 hits on JSTOR and 305 on Google Scholar. Usage is mixed. continuity paradox"+"chicken" returns just 1 hit on JSTOR and 8 on GScholar. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:48, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, and besides being unmentioned, those few hits seem to be referring to something specific in the development of human language, in a related way, but not quite the same. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:30, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, it doesn't seem to be synonymous with chicken or the egg in linguistics although sometimes is used in a related sense, and that's a small fraction of the uses. I should also note that I searched the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy for this phrase and found nothing. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete - Agree with nom - term has mixed/unrelated meanings and is not a synonym for "chicken or the egg" - and no mention at the target Asteramellus (talk) 00:34, 11 May 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 💬 22:35, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• TCOE → The City of Ember  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is an unnecessary acronym because the book doesn't go by it and it is not really needed, so I think it should be deleted. –The Twists and Turns talk|my edits 18:44, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete, barring any better targets being found. The nom is a bit awkward, but there's nothing to suggest this is a commonly used abbreviation. A quick web search finds all sorts of other things that use it as well. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 18:51, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• I'm fine with delete, but wouldn't it make more sense to retarget it to Tasha's Cauldron of Everything? It seems that the abbreviation is used in review articles. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:28, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete Agree with nom and it seems the abbreviation is used by multiple unrelated topics e.g. see - so it might be misleading to redirect to Tasha's Cauldron of Everything Asteramellus (talk) 00:38, 11 May 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 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:34, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• 1-888-GO-BELLE → Belle Tire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is not mentioned in the target article, which leads to readers being surprised. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Checking from a Google search, this phone number verifiably belongs to the company. This is not a harmful redirect. Considering the redirect is categorised with a specific phone number template, there must be an allowance for this page to continue existing. Qwerty123M (talk) 13:42, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete, Wikipedia is not a phone book, and barring something especially unusual, like an extraordinary noteworthiness to the phone number itself that allows for a mention at the article, we do not maintain redirects to businesses based on phone numbers. Pretty much every business (especially of any significant size) has an 800 number. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:44, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per Deacon Vorbis. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:55, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep {{R from search term}} -- just as with a website address, this would be a reasonable way to find the company -- ~2026-25149-07 (talk) 10:28, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete per all. Jay 💬 13:48, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete as unmentioned. Redirects from phone numbers that are notable enough to be mentioned are fine, but rarely otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 14:14, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:34, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete Agree with delete comments above - Wikipedia is not a phone book and seems implausible search term Asteramellus (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:25, 12 May 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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• UNSW FC (women)UNSW FC (women) → University of New South Wales  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nothing about a women's football club is mentioned in the target article, which leads to readers being surprised. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Keep: the club does indeed exist, though I'm unsure where to include it in the article. It could also have its own page, but my to-do list for article creation is too big at this current point in time. Schestos (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete This redirect is not helpful without a mention, and the article doesn't discuss any athletic clubs. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 00:49, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per Schestos; I have added to the article. GiantSnowman 18:09, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• keep now has a cited mention in the article --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:30, 12 May 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 R3 speedy deleted by BusterD. (non-admin closure) DAmik001 (talk) 21:59, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

• 12278 → List of bus routes in London  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirects to London bus route 122, which redirects to List of bus routes in London. Not a plausable search term for that article. DAmik001 (talk) 06:34, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

I fixed the double redirect, but my other problem remains. DAmik001 (talk) 06:41, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. There are no bus routes in London with more than three digits, so it's definitely not a plausible search term for the current target. Bustimes.org tells me that 12278 is the fleet number of a specific bus that is today running on route 122, but just this month has also run on routes 53, 161, 177, 422 and 602 so even if searching Wikipedia for details about an individual bus were plausible, neither the current nor original targets are suitable. London Buses route 122 was created as an article, but the last version before redirection didn't contain any information about individual buses (even if it were a notable route, it would be very unusual for it to). Of course the fleet number thing could be a coincidence, but that would leave the connection between redirect and the target even less clear. Thryduulf (talk) 11:40, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• Delete The redirect only exists because the user originally created the article London bus route 122, for whatever reason, under the name 12278, and then moved it themselves, creating this redirect (which was then changed again when London bus route 122 was redirected). Black Kite (talk) 12:32, 8 May 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 disambiguate. Wiktionary has a definition for the Spanish and Portuguese gender-neutral neologism, plural of todo. pt:Todes Telecom was deleted 5 years ago as a page created by blocked or banned editor, but here's a link to their website. wbm1058 (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Todes → Alla Duhova#Todes ballet  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Disambiguate: Samuel Todes and Gender neutrality in languages with grammatical gender#Spanish; see also Tode, it:Operatori virtuali di rete mobile in America#_Brasile and wikt:todes. Dudzcar (talk) 06:31, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• support dab per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:29, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• Disambiguation draft requested (done) Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:30, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
• I've drafted a minimal dab, using what targets are possible to put in. J947 ‡ ^edits 10:34, 20 May 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. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:00, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Orthodox ChristianityOrthodox Christianity → Orthodox Church  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I think it would probably make more sense to target this to Orthodox#Christian, comparing the two for how relevant they are to the search term. Dingolover6969 (talk) 04:39, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note this is effectively seeking to reverse the 2023 RfD. Pinging the non-blocked participants of that discussion: @Red-tailed hawk, Presidentman, and Scyrme:. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per Scyrme's 2023 reasoning; nothing has changed since to justify reversing the previous RfC. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:32, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep per the previous RfD and the above. I think it's very unlikely that anyone would enter this looking for "orthodox vs heretical" rather than "Orthodox vs Catholic", which the proposed change would implement. Tevildo (talk) 08:19, 9 May 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. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:39, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Dhruva Natchathiram (2025 film)Dhruva Natchathiram (2025 film) → Dhruva Natchathiram (unreleased film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Never had a scheduled release for 2025. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:14, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Per the target article: In January 2025, Menon stated that many of the film's issues were resolved and aimed to release it within a few months. Harris Jayaraj later suggested an April 2025 release, though this did not pan out. In June 2025, Menon vowed not to commit to new projects until the film was released and said the film's issues were still being resolved, hoping for a launch by July or August 2025. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:32, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:08, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Comment: Those were estimates or wishful thinking, and should not count as concrete or official plans. Kailash29792 (talk) 23:24, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I would disagree with that given that the plans were given from the director/producer, which is the most public-facing official working on this film. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:01, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:16, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep per Tavix and K4. Not ambiguous. No idea why the base title was deleted at RfD, by the way. J947 ‡ ^edits 00:22, 8 May 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).