Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 16: Difference between revisions

< June 15

June 17 >

June 16

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 16, 2025.

Ji Seo-yeon (singer)

• Ji Seo-yeon (singer) → TripleS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Salt evasion of Ji Seo-yeon, it is soft redirect?, TripleS member involved in several page (TripleS#Members metioned it.) after redirect AfD closure. Delete encourage article creation per WP:RETURNTORED. 216.247.95.184 (talk) 23:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Keep hard-redirect to TripleS. WP:PRIMARY is Ji Seo-yeon, a {{For}} hatnote could be added to the PRIMARY if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

  • @Paper9oll Huh??

  124.104.166.143 (talk) 08:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Kilma

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

Delete. Very implausible misspelling of target. GilaMonster536 (talk) 22:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Delete unless someone can provide a connection between the two. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 07:34, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Big Hero

• Big Hero → Big Hero 6 (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It doesn't feel right for this to lead straight to the film article since "Big Hero 6" is a disambiguation. I am RedoStone (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Big Hero 6. मल्ल (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Blo.gs

• Blo.gs → Automattic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's not mentioned anywhere on the target page Stumbling9655 (talk) 13:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Comment This has some history. It was originally created as an article in 2006 and promptly merged to Yahoo. It is mentioned at List of Yahoo-owned sites and services, which was split from the Yahoo article. It was restarted as an article in 2007 and lasted until 2016, when it was redirected to Automattic, where it was previously mentioned before being removed with this edit in 2024. 9ninety (talk) 15:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Breathe (upcoming film)

• Breathe (upcoming film) → Breathe (2024 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

2024 is no longer upcoming, and 9 pageviews per 30 days seems like "noise" to me User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:30, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Keep for now. Looking at the stats this has consistently been getting hits every few days, sometimes rising to 2-3 hits in a day, all year with a couple of slightly longer gaps. The gap since the last hit on 31 May is only very slightly longer than those other gaps so while it might be that the utility has ended it has been nominated 1-2 weeks too soon to be able to actually know that so now we need to wait a month or so after this discussion has been closed to find out whether it is actually still useful or not. Thryduulf (talk) 20:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:UFILM, it was released more than 30 days ago and pageviews have tapered off. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Tavix. Steel1943 (talk) 18:45, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Spider-Man (video game series)

• Spider-Man (video game series) → Marvel's Spider-Man  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Spider-Man (Insomniac Games series) was moved to this title without discussion in December 2023. The article was recently moved again to Marvel's Spider-Man following this RM. One of the points I noted in that RM was that the title Spider-Man (video game series) is ambiguous with other Spider-Man video games series, such as the 2002–07 games and the early 2000s series. I think it should be retargeted to List of video games featuring Spider-Man. 9ninety (talk) 11:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Support retarget per nom. There have been multiple series of video games about Spider-Man and a casual reader may not know that, so the redirect target should serve to help them find what they are looking for rather than assuming they're looking for the Insomniac series. silviaASH (inquire within) 18:28, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:RESULT

• Wikipedia:RESULT → Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Military history#Primary infoboxes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Too ambiguous; same reason MOS:RESULT was deleted   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Saying "MOS:RESULT was deleted" without explaining the context is somewhat misleading. What happened with it was its creator, SMcCandlish, created MOS:RESULT and then about a minute later, moved it without redirect to MOS:MILRESULT. In addition, if anything, in the "Wikipedia:" and "MOS:" namespaces, "ambiguous" is better served with a disambiguation page (provided the redirect is not too old and frequently linked). Steel1943 (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• WP:RESULT is definitely too ambiguous, and we should not be redirecting unclear WP:-namespace shortcuts to MoS sections. It would be better to make an internal disambiguation page, including MOS:MILRESULT and various other pages that have "result[s]" in their name or which tally the results of processes or catalogue common results of recurrent debates, and whatever else someone might be looking for when they take a stab at "WP:RESULT". Send WP:RESULTS to same place.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Help:Searching#Search results page to match WP:RESULTS. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Whipping Boy (American band)

• Whipping Boy (American band) → List of bands from the San Francisco Bay Area  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirects to a list of examples (notable entries) -- now removed from that list given this is just a redirect. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:00, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• Restore article without prejudice to AfD as a contested BLAR. The content was way above the A7 threshold so there is no justification for summary deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
  • Nobody CSDed it. If you want to restore unsourced content that makes claims about living people, you can do that in your capacity as an editor, just as it was blanked by Bolelyn as an editorial decision. I don't know why you'd want to do that, though, unless you were planning on improving it (in which case, we can just speedy close this). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:00, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
• Delete, agreeing with Boleyn's findings of a lack of sources and notability. I also note that the BLAR has not been contested, that would require someone to make an argument in favor of the article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:14, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

  Nominating a BLARed article at RfD is contesting the BLAR. My recommendation to restore is also an explicit contesting of the BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 20:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

  Nominating a redirect that has been blank-and-redirected is only a contestation of the WP:BLAR if they are in favor of restoration. If they support deletion of the underlying content, that's quite the opposite of a contestation. Rhododentries' response to you shows that they are not in favor of restoration. Your !vote also doesn't show any support for the article. It implies that it doesn't meet A7, but that's completely irrelevant to this discussion because this isn't WP:CSD. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:46, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Desalination membrane

• Desalination membrane → Reverse osmosis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the body of the target article in this specific manner, thus making it unclear why readers would be redirected to the current target article when searching this term. I was originally going to WP:BOLDly retarget this redirect to Membrane distillation, but after reviewing that article, I'm not convinced that that article and the nominated redirect represent the same subject, especially considering that Desalination is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 06:36, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep - reverse osmosis relies heavily on membranes, and the section #Desalination does mention membranes quite a bit. While it doesn't outright say "desalination membrane" (except in the references) it does talk about membranes in the context of desalination a lot. --Plantman (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Switching to weak keep, more in favour of retargetting. See below. --Plantman (talk) 07:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I get that, but the same claim could apparently be made regarding membranes for the whole concept of Desalination in general; Reverse osmosis, Membrane distillation, and Desalination all make reference to using "membranes". Steel1943 (talk) 06:52, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

@Steel1943 I feel like either Reverse osmosis or Desalination is the best place for this to point to. I'm slightly leaning towards Desalination now, because it provides an overview of all the different uses of membranes in desalination process. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping it as it is (pointing to RO) if there was a consensus to do so. --Plantman (talk) 07:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks Pppery for reopening this discussion. I was originally going to post a message on the closer's talk page, but I saw they are indef blocked. (I was going to argue that in the discussion's current state, I would believe this discussion would be closed to "no consensus", "retarget", or relisted again, not closed to "keep".) Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target Desalination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)