Taxus Baccata

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 deleted per WP:CSD#G7 by GB fan. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ClockworkSoul/Templates → Spork  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This redirect doesn't make any sense in relation to its target article (like the apples-to-oranges situation), because "ClockworkSoul/Templates" is not an alternative name or related topic of "spork". It is only linked from one of the templates transcluded at User:ClockworkSoul/Templates. However, it does not seem to fit any of the speedy deletion criteria. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 19:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• {{Db-error}} probably applies. In any case, delete. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it gives the appearance to me as being a deliberate creation - I'd guess to give a humorous result for someone linking/transcluding incorrectly (there was more tolerance of that sort of whimsy back then) - so G6 wouldn't apply. Whatever value it might have had in 2005 though it doesn't have in 2024. Thryduulf (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I created it accidentally (I imagine) about 20 years ago, and it has no value now as it had no value then. – ClockworkSoul 16:33, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Daniel Edwards (name) (disambiguation) → Daniel Edwards (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The target is not a list of articles that might otherwise be called "Daniel Edwards (name)". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. People using this are looking for a list of articles about people who are or who could plausibly be referred to as "Daniel Edwards". This is exactly what they will find at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 09:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not sure I understand the nominator's rationale here, because, this is a list of articles that might otherwise be called "Daniel Edwards". - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Presidentman: Oops, sorry, edited my nomination statement. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for clarifying. Changing my !vote to delete per nom and Tavix. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 01:05, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I reject the notion that people are using this, it's entirely implausible on two fronts. Per WP:APOAT, the "(name)" disambiguator is only used for surnames and given names, not for full names. There is no expectation of using "Daniel Edwards (name)" and finding a full name. I also believe that two disambiguation tags is implausible as a search term. One is arguable if you have an idea of how pages are titled and assume the article you're looking for isn't a primary topic. However, pages are never titled with double disambiguation, so it's not natural to search that way. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Tavix. I go nothing to add in addition to their stance in the matter. Steel1943 (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Tavix. Additionally and in general, house-specific titling conventions should not be propagated incorrectly (e.g. with two disambiguators) because the existence of such errors might encourage the few readers who stumble upon them to assume that similar redirects exist of the same type for other targets as well. We often cannot control this because errors develop naturally in the wild; however we can and should when it comes to unnatural errors specific to us (i.e. our unique conventions). Not dealing with these is akin to encouraging and teaching our readers to search incorrectly. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 18:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Bharatiya Janata Party's appointment of Narendra Modi as prime ministerial candidate for the 2014 Indian general election → Prime ministerial candidacy of Narendra Modi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 
• Bharatiya Janata Party's appointment of Narendra Modi as Prime Ministerial candidate for the 2014 Indian general election → Prime ministerial candidacy of Narendra Modi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]
• 2013 announcement of prime ministerial candidacy of Narendra Modi → Prime ministerial candidacy of Narendra Modi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This title is way too long. It's irrelevant and not appropriate for normal search for the short and up to the point target — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 09:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Nominated the first redirect on behalf of the nom, who added the RfD tag without adding it to the log. CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Title length is irrelevant and these appear to be accurate descriptions of content found at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Accurate, but they are implausible search terms. The purpose of redirects is to help people arrive more quickly at the page they want to read. The descriptions are not a set phrase used by media outlets or something, they have 0 hits on Google. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Ca: even if these redirects are accurate, they are still implausible search terms, and the lack of pageviews before they were nominated shows this. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 07:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Kangal (dog) (disambiguation) → Kangal (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There is only one article about "Kangal" in the context of dogs: Kangal Shepherd Dog, to which Kangal (dog) and Kangal Dog now redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom BugGhost🪲👻 19:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:XY. At the end of the day, this is a malformed 'double disambiguation' as described at WP:RDAB. Given that this title could just as equally point to the disambiguation page or the article regarding the dog breed because of the two qualifications, it is doubly inappropriate. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 04:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, "Kangal (dog)" is not ambiguous. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Mandie (name) (disambiguation) → Mandie (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The target is not a list of articles that might otherwise be called "Mandie (name)". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. People using this are looking for a list of articles that use "Mandie" as a name. Such a list exists at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 09:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • People using this aren't going to type it in: they're only using it because it's there (cluttering the Search box). If it wasn't there, they'd select Mandie (name). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    That might be true if the internal search engine was the only method of finding Wikipedia articles. However that is not the only method of finding Wikipedia content and people evidently find these types of titles useful (otherwise they wouldn't keep being created). Alleged "clutter" of suggested results in the search engine is not harmful and is not a reason to delete a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 09:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    It's easy to see how this redirect was created (hint: it's not because people are searching for it): Miracle Pen created a name index at Mandie (name), but incorrectly labeled it a disambiguation page. Then, Rodw created this redirect using DisamAssist, which follows WP:INTDABLINK. A few hours later, Leschnei redirected it to Mandie (disambiguation), which is the correct solution to WP:INCOMPDAB creations (as it was tagged as a disambiguation page). So the only reason this redirect exists is because a WP:INTDABLINK patroller got to the page before a WP:INCOMPDAB patroller. The redirect is thus a relic from an incorrect set-up that had been resolved within less than a day. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:XY. Double disambiguation that could equally point to Mandy (name) or Mandie (disambiguation) given both qualifiers. The properly formatted 'Mandie (name)' already exists.— Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 05:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  We do not and should not require readers to be experts in Wikipedia page naming conventions before being allowed to find the content they are unquestionably looking for. Mandie (name) and Mandie (disambiguation) are the same page so there is no ambiguity. Thryduulf (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  House-specific titling conventions should not be propagated incorrectly because the existence of such errors might encourage the few readers who stumble upon them to assume that similar redirects exist of the same type for other targets as well. We often cannot control this because errors develop in the wild; however we can and should when it comes to errors specific to us (i.e. our unique conventions). Not dealing with these is akin to encouraging and teaching (if you will) our readers to search incorrectly. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 21:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per my response above. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unnecessary, potentially unhelpful, double disambiguation. Steel1943 (talk) 00:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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. ✗plicit 14:18, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Erdschias-Gebiet → Anatolia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete per WP:RLOTE and the fact that Anatolia is not known in German as "Erdschias-Gebiet." Mia Mahey (talk) 01:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. "Gebiet" just means area. I am finding some uses of this term and the similar "Gebiet des Erdschias-Dagh" but almost exclusively in relation to the location of animal species (especially lizards and moths/butterflies) that are native to Anatolia and surrounding areas, and frequently referencing the work Ergebnisse einer naturwissenschaftlichen Reise zum Erdschias-Dagh. (Kleinasien) by Arnold Penther. "Kleinasien" translates to Asia Minor (a synonym of Anatolia) however that's the only term that I find hits for in the German Wikipedia or German Wiktionary. Reference 94 at Myrrha translates "Erdschias-Gebiet" as "Erciyes region", Erciyes is a volcano in Anatolia but the same word is used as the title for the de.wp article. So this is very much something that it would be plausible for someone to be searching for (maybe in English, definitely in German) but we don't have anywhere useful to send them. Thryduulf (talk) 02:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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).