Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 18

November 18

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 18, 2025.

Juxta Crucem

Juxta Crucem → Epsilon Crucis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Fake star name that someone on Wikipedia made up. Appears as a line in the hymn Stabat Mater, possible retarget? Or just delete. SevenSpheres (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the name is fake and the mention in Stabat Mater is very trivial. 21 Andromedae (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per 21. It looks like the article was actually created at this title and sat there for a few years as a stub before being moved away, but I can't find a shred of evidence for the claim made about its name, so I think that outweighs any concerns about being an R from move. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete WP:A11 and WP:G3 specifically {{Db-hoax}}. Pinging everyone in discussion @21.Andromedae @Deacon Vorbis @Lenticel and nom @SevenSpheres to see if they agree and want to change their vote.

Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with such a possibility. 21 Andromedae (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against speedy deletion per G3. The rest of what I write in my vote below stands. Renerpho (talk) 08:58, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, and list as a type 4 at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia#False statements in articles, analogous to the already listed "Durre Menthor" hoax. This has had quite a bit of impact that is worth documenting: "Juxta Crucem" was part of the original article creation (Special:Diff/84341535), where it survived from 29 October 2006 until 16 June 2009 (Special:Diff/296757076), when it was turned into a redirect with the edit summary "moved Juxta Crucem to Epsilon Crucis over redirect: Deleted "original reserch". It has remained as a redirect since then, but has found its way into a number of images on Commons in the meantime (like File:Cruz del Sur.jpg and File:Crux. Constelación.png, both from 2014). It is the main title of mk:Јужен Крст (соѕвездие) at the Makedonian Wikipedia, and was the main title at many other Wikipedia projects at some point in the past. For example, the Spanish Wikipedia used this as their article title since 2008, until it was turned into a redirect when the star was officially named in 2018, see this diff. Renerpho (talk) 16:47, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed corresponding mentions in the Italian and German Wikipedia articles, and made talk pages notes at some other projects where I don't speak the language. Renerpho (talk) 18:32, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imal

Imal → Delta Crucis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Typo of the star name "Imai", created by mistake. I see some other uses like people with the given name, but nothing with its own article (except Imal Liyanage, a disambiguation page listing two redirects). Could be disambiguated or just deleted. SevenSpheres (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RETURNTORED, "iMAL" is a likely notable art museum in Brussels [1]. Katzrockso (talk) 08:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrium

Umbrium → Diazepam (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. I rather expected to end up somewhere like Umbria. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 18:07, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, NIH lists "Umbrium" as one of many trade names for diazepam. Omphalographer (talk) 18:54, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. This is a standard {{R from trade name}}. Some drug articles have dozens of brand name redirects though, appropriately, only one or two prominent brand names will be mentioned in the article. I question the wisdom of creating all these redirects but it is an established practice. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TikTok Rizz Party

TikTok Rizz Party → Brain rot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

per the previous rfd, though i'm not sure this would count as g4, since it's been a while consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:26, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom/rfd. Happy Editing -- IAm Chaos 21:43, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Ray Cyrus Daughter

Billy Ray Cyrus Daughter → Miley Cyrus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Miley is not the only daughter of Billy Ray. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 18:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Billy Ray Cyrus#Relationships and family where all his daughters are listed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:41, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, another WP:PANDORA case. "Person X family member Y" type redirects should be explicitly discouraged. On top of that, this one is an ungrammatical, oddly-capitalized juxtaposition of search terms rather than a plausible topic title -- another general type of redirect we should be discouraging. MW has a search feature for a reason. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Odd grammatically, Miley is not his only daughter, and not a common search term with a daily average of <1 pageview from 17 Nov 2024 to 17 Nov 2025. (I had thought Cyrus Family Tree could work, but that is about Cyrus the Great) Casablanca 🪨^(T) 23:54, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Might be problematic to start a precedent with. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, erroneous grammar. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 05:07, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this type of redirect is not appropriate / useful Shazback (talk) 21:03, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Make your own soap

Make your own soap → Soap (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

per the afd, it was an unsourced guide with seemingly user-generated "references". the target currently has no info on homemade or handmade soap beyond mentioning that it exists, and neither does soaper consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and AfD. Not a single participant in the 2007 AfD recommended a redirect. It was bafflingly redirected to Soapmaking which subsequently became a redirect to Soap. The article apparently contained content copied from Soapmaking but there's no indication that any content was merged to that article or anywhere else. This should be deleted now as it should have been almost 20 years ago at AfD. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i just realized this could've been a g6, assuming closures against consensus count. oops consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:26, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is a plausible interpretation of {{Db-xfd}} G6. Consensus was straightforwardly in favor of deletion and the closer gave no rationale for their decision to redirect instead. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it's worth a try, i guess consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 23:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, no harm in leaving it be a few more days instead of doing an experimental DRV-speedy. Don't necessarily take this as a precedent, but it does deserve a much broader discussion at WT:CSD if we want to go with that as a criterion. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:31, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i mean, this definitely wouldn't be the only case of a close against consensus that i could name as precedent, and it doesn't seem to be shaping up to be the only case of a subsequent discussion closing as delete at least partially per the first discussion's consensus. maybe it'll be the only case in which the first discussion was also old enough to consent at the time of tagging? the fact that this is a maybe should probably concern me, but i'm too lazy for that consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 23:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd definitely have declined such a CSD if I were the patrolling admin. It's not my responsibility as CSD-reviewer to second-guess another admin's closures - if you want to second-guess a closure there are separate processes for that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:46, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PANDORA. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
really, this pandora thing isn't helping much. it's as helpful a deletion rationale as cheap is a keep rationale consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 20:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine to Soap#Soapmaking which has the relevant content. WP:PANDORA makes absolutely no sense here. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The mere existence of the discussion here is a strong indicator that G6 would be inappropriate. That said, delete or refine?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 18:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. PANDORA does actually apply here, despite the protestations, but so does common sense, that this is simply not a helpful search term. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unhelpful. I have doubts on how much this counts as a PANDORA but in any case this is a wrongful closure from eighteen years ago, a discussion that should have been closed as delete instead of redirect. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 08:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am trying to decide if Soaper or Soap#Soapmaking, suggested by Tavix, are plausible targets. I lean against it, not least because of the poor quality of Soaper. I know here may not be the place for this question, but does anyone know what's the evidence for this 2008 addition ("It is the origin of the surname ... "Saboni" (arabic for soapmaker)")? I find no indication that this etymology is correct, aside from lots of Wikipedia mirrors. There is wikt:sabuni, for which I do find ample evidence, but that's not what the article is saying... Renerpho (talk) 16:12, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

neither have any info on homemade soap, thus there's no info on making "your own soap". a title like this would also step on notguide, now that i think about it consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars bundle

Frozarns → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Frozarns (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Frozian → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Frozian (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gorith → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gorith (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gwurran → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gwurran (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hallotan → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Hallotan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ottarious → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gorith (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Telbun → List of Star Wars species (F–J) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned on Wikipedia. Delete TNstingray (talk) 15:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not mentioned at target. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:24, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Better served in Wookiepedia --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gossam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 25#Gossam

Drall (Star Wars)

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 Star Wars planets and moons. Will also retarget the related redirect mentioned by Tavix. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 16:50, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drall (Star Wars)Drall (Star Wars) → List of Star Wars species (A–E)#Drall (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, super obscure species that can probably be deleted as cruft TNstingray (talk) 15:14, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a mention at List of Star Wars planets and moons, so it can be retargeted there along with Drall (Star Wars species). -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Star Wars planets and moons per Tavix. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2025 (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).

Dandilion Warrior

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. ^Complex/_Rational 15:34, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dandilion Warrior → List of Star Wars species (A–E) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned on Wikipedia, appears to be an obscure plantoid race known by the Ewoks, called "Fftssfft", which itself is not mentioned on Wikipedia either. Delete as cruft. TNstingray (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, obscure and not mentioned at target. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete better served in Wookiepedia --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:56, 19 November 2025 (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).

Baby wash

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 Baby shampoo. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baby washBaby wash → Detergent (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

weird case, oh boy. i thought this would've been a clear-cut retarget to shampoo#baby, where it's mentioned, but as it turns out, results were torn between pretty much everything but detergent. shampoo, liquid soap, machines you toss babies in to make them get clean (more like a car wash than washing machine, from the looks of it), the act of washing babies, several assorted products named "baby wash" whose only common trait is being extremely proud of how much they're not soap, etc. so uh... what do? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to baby shampoo as the primary topic. Wikipedia doesn't cover machines you toss babies in to get them clean so it's irrelevant from a disambiguation standpoint and the rest don't have baby-specific articles. The exception is Bathing#Bathing babies but I don't think that'd be the topic sought when searching "baby wash" (maybe "baby washing" or "washing baby"). -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:32, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to baby shampoo since that seems to be the primary topic. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to baby shampoo as plausible synonym --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:00, 19 November 2025 (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).

B Company, 2 MERICAN

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 Deleted. As G7 (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:48, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B Company, 2 MERICAN → Mercian Regiment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Two issues: One, the term Mercian was misspelled as Merican. Second of all, according to the Mercian Regimental Charity official website, there is no 2nd batallion; there's only a 1st and a 4th. I suggest deletion Duckmather (talk) 14:34, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As Original creator, you can delete it. I did not notice the incorrect spelling until today, sorry about that. 2nd Battalion did exist between 2007 (as per here Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment#History last sentence) and 2022 (as per here Mercian Regiment#History fourth from last sentence). The reason for creation was to link the unit listings on the Operation Herrick order of battle article. Gavbadger (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2025 (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).

Afronaut

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 Afronauts with a hatnote to Edward Makuka Nkoloso. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:07, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfronautAfronaut → Afrofuturism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at the target, aside from an external link to an article about music, which is only tangentially related to the actual subject. A better target seems to be Edward Makuka Nkoloso, which actually discusses the strange thing that is the 1960s Zambian space program. Renerpho (talk) 11:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts as a misnomer. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:32, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts and tag as R to plural (or more appropriate tags). --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts with a hatnote to Nkoloso for the actual space program attempt. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 05:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from nominator I have no issue with retargeting to Afronauts, as long as we actually put in the hatnote as Frank suggests. Renerpho (talk) 19:50, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget →to Afronauts with hatnote as suggested by Frank Shazback (talk) 21:08, 20 November 2025 (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).

Ahillya Harjani, Yeoh Kay Ee

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 25#Ahillya Harjani, Yeoh Kay Ee

DWPM-FM

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. ^Complex/_Rational 15:34, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DWPM-FM → DWPM (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

False callsign. No such thing as "DWPM-FM" from NTC on the FM listing https://ntc.gov.ph/list-of-authorized-broadcast-stations/. ~2025-34478-28 (talk) 09:06, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Few search results, no indication that this is a common alternate name. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A DWPM-FM apparently existed, but it is not the subject of this article nor would it be likely to pass the GNG. Delete. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:08, 20 November 2025 (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).