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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:CN/Unblocking of Daniel Brandt → Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Community sanction/Unblocking of Daniel Brandt  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect has no incoming links, and Wikipedia:CN is a disambiguation page. Since the aforementioned page is a disambiguation page, though unlikely, a reader could think that this could relate to any page listed on the disambiguation page, even thinking this could refer to something such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon Network/Unblocking of Daniel Brandt. Steel1943 (talk) 23:09, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This doesn't need a shortcut. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Makes no sense. — Gorthian (talk) 17:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as confusing --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Jayce Salloum → Jackie Salloum  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Jayce Salloum is a different person, so either there should be an article about him, or there should not, but it shouldn't redirect to Jackie Salloum. It's not a credible misspelling. Slashme (talk) 22:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree, it should not be a redirect. It looks as if Jayce Slalom is notable enough for his own article, Huldra (talk) 22:35, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Hello, I am the author of the article and am not 100% sure if I did this correctly. Upon my searching for Jayce Salloum I would always be directed to Jackie Salloum, so I created the article - this was my first time authoring/editing an article. Please let me know how I can correctly input this information in order to have a proper article for the artist Jayce Salloum - who I believe is notable enough to merit his own wiki article User:Corie.waugh (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:06, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore to Corie.waugh's version of the article before it was inexplicably converted back into a redirect by My Pants Metal. Uanfala (talk) 09:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore per Corie.waugh. Notable artist from Vancouver who has appeared in multiple news articles and won a Governor General's Award in Visual and Media Arts. [1] . AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I´m pinging User:Gorthian, as they seem to think that the Corie.waugh-version was a copy-right violation. (I haven´t looked into it). It might be an idea that Corie.waguh develops the article in user-space, Huldra (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, the text in that version matched the text from a couple of different websites. Corie.waugh Is brand new, and undoubtably unfamiliar with our copyright policies. That version has been revdeleted now, so if there is to be an article, it needs to be started from scratch. I hope Corie.waugh would still like to work on it. — Gorthian (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, I´ve started User:Corie.waugh/Jayce Salloum, I´ll hope Corie.waugh will develop it? I´ll keep an eye on it, Huldra (talk) 22:45, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huldra, you accidentally created that page in article space. I've moved it to User:Corie.waugh/Jayce Salloum and updated your link above. — Gorthian (talk) 17:56, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete to make room for the article, whoever writes it. — Gorthian (talk) 17:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Hello, I will author the article. Just trying to figure out how. - User:Corie.waugh (User talk:Corie.waugh|talk]]) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.218.226.140 (talk) 00:45, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:REDLINK and clear notability of the subject. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. --BDD (talk) 16:09, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• GROHL, DAVID ERIC → Dave Grohl  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as an implausible search term. I can't imagine anyone searching using his full name, IN CAPS, and searching with the surname first. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless google comes up with a case-sensitive search option so we can see if the all caps version has any special currency. Uanfala (talk) 21:58, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. No commas in names. Not a Eastern name either. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as an implausible search term. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:18, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as plausible search term. "Last name, First name Middlename" is often used for citation styles when the creator of a work has a middle name, and this would just be an alternate capitalization. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:18, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I really don't see this as a plausible search term. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Texas Tech University Center in Quedlinburg → Texas Tech University#Campus  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Texas tech university center in quedlinburg → Texas Tech University#Campus  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Texas Tech University Center in Seville → Texas Tech University#Campus  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Texas tech university center in seville → Texas Tech University#Campus  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The only mention of these centers at the target article is that they exist. So we can safely say any reader searching for these terms already knows at least as much as he or she could learn from the page. --BDD (talk) 20:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. If the branch is notable this can be created as a redlink and mentioned in the school's navbox. Otherwise it's treated like a branch office (e.g. We've got centers in (list of cities).) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:47, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Iron Horse Literary Review → Texas Tech University  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target article. Whether it's notable or not, this should be red for now. BDD (talk) 20:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's a literary journal from Texas Tech. [2] [3] so it would fit under their English department, but since there is no separate article on Texas Tech's English department or a section for this journal, this doesn't need a link. If the founder Jill Patterson had an article, this could also be a redirect candidate. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:49, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Evangelical Lutheran Church in Namibia (GELK) → Evangelical Lutheran Church in Namibia  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The church it redirects to is a different church, as that article points out. Indeed, the article links back to this redirect. Either someone should create this article, or the redirect ought to be deleted. Newbiepedian (talk · contribs · X! · logs) 18:24, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Interesting. The linked article does in fact mention the GELK church and gives information about it (namely, that it's German-speaking), so in that sense the redirect does its job. On the other hand, there's at least a tiny risk of confusion owing to the possibility that the redirect will make someone think the two churches are the same. Whatever happened to the "redirects from antonyms" problem; was that ever resolved? This isn't an antonym, but the issues seem somewhat related. --Trovatore (talk) 20:12, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete if it's going to the wrong church then the redlink should encourage creation of the second article for two dabs. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:57, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:REDLINK. Not the same church, so misleading. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:05, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Derelict (2010 film) → Derelict (film)  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The 2010 film article was deleted at AfD back in 2012, and this redirect to the unrelated 1930 film appears to have been created in error. PC78 (talk) 17:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I've updated the name of the target page, since there appears to be only one notable film of this name. --BDD (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not notable and points to wrong film anyway. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as misleading --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:18, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Rikurzhen/randi (References) → Race and intelligence  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I assume these are authors on a work about race and intelligence, but neither are mentioned at all at the target article. BDD (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete wrong disambiguator. There isn't an article on Rikurzhen/randi or even Rikurzhen. No searches on news or books for such a title. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Totally worthless. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• J. Philippe Rushton (References) → Race and intelligence  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Absurdly misleading. You'd expect this to go to J. Philippe Rushton#References, if anything. Since we don't make such redirects, I recommend deletion. BDD (talk) 17:28, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete (per nom). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Looks like an open-and-shut case for deletion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 22:56, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. Noting the discretionary sanctions arising from Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence, I'm defaulting to delete on the basis that there's consensus the current target is not appropriate. Deryck C. 14:47, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Between-Group Differences in IQ → Race and intelligence  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I've noted the target article as one with many redirects that need attention. For now, I'm just nominating some of the most egregious. This one is meaningless without context. Many different groups could have their IQ compared. It's an unlikely search term, and not one we could really serve. Note that Between-group differences in IQ was PRODed back in 2010. Since this really should've redirected there, and thus been speedily deleted G8, this is arguably a G6 case today. BDD (talk) 17:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not a proper term or book title. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:02, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Outline_of_human_intelligence#Related_factors where different areas that could cause it are listed. This phrasing is used in academic books exactly or explicitly using the first three words in the context of IQ. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Grave Peril (film) → The Dresden Files  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This film article was redirected but looking at the sources and external links that were used, as well as some of the comments in the edit history, it appears that this was nothing more than a hoax. That being so this redirect serves no purpose. PC78 (talk) 16:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and housekeeping. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - There is no such film. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Bold (disambiguation) → Wikipedia:Be bold  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target page is not a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 14:47, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:54, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Do disambiguation pages exist in the WP namespace? If so, then Wikipedia:Bold (disambiguation) could conceivably include a link to Wikipedia:Be bold and to the part of the WP:MOS that talks about the use of bold font weight. Uanfala (talk) 21:55, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Uanfala: See Category:Wikipedia disambiguation pages. (I've created a few such pages myself.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Wikipedia:Bold was formerly a disambiguation page (which is why the nominated redirect exists), but at some point, a primary topic was determined somehow for this term (pointing towards Wikipedia:Be bold), and a hatnote pointing to MOS:BOLD (a redirect that directs readers to information about bold font) was added to the top of Wikipedia:Be bold. In my opinion, for the term "bold" without any variants (bolded, bolding, etc.) definitely refers to the subject in Wikipedia:Be bold, avoiding a WP:SURPRISE. (When Wikipedia:Bold was a disambiguation page, it only included 2 entries: Wikipedia:Be bold and the target of MOS:BOLD. Wikipedia:Bold's most recent edit [redirecting to Wikipedia:Be bold] happened in December 2007.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:17, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Steel1943, all this comes as a reminder for me to look in a bit more detail at the target pages before asking any hasty questions. Uanfala (talk) 08:49, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not a DAB page and only gets 1 hit a year prior to this RfD. Not useful and adds potential cost to maintain. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 both.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:BOAR → User:Eyu100/Bot area  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:Boar → User:Eyu100/Bot area  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It doesn't look like these shortcuts were ever used, and doesn't look like they ever will be in regards to their current target. Unless there is a good retargeting option for these shortcuts can be thought of, it's probably best to delete them so they have the potential to be utilized for something else later. Steel1943 (talk) 12:08, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both - Not useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

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 all.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:57, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguation:Bagger → Bagger (disambiguation)  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Disambiguation:HIS → His  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Disambiguation: Imam Ahmad → Imam Ahmad  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Disambiguation: SNV → SNV  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Disambiguation: The Time of Our Lives → Time of Our Lives  (links · history · )     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These pseudo-namespace redirects are not useful, and we need to obtain consensus before creating similar redirects for other dab pages. 24.205.8.104 (talk) 03:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all: Four were the result of long-ago page moves to correct titles, and SNV was created as an unnecessary duplicate dab page and redirected to the existing one. None of them useful. PamD 09:12, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - Lets just be rid of these. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:43, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.