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The result of the discussion was withdrawn. Note that these are now stubs, and are no longer in the purview of RFD, hence the withdrawal. Primefac (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Head III → Francis Bacon (artist)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Head IV → Francis Bacon (artist)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Head V → Francis Bacon (artist)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These three redirects are all paintings by Francis Bacon. They are part of a six piece series. I, II and VI already have articles. These three do not yet have articles but they could plausibly be turned into articles. They are not discussed in the article on Francis Bacon at this time. They fall into WP:RFD#DELETE #10. ~ GB fan 12:06, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• • Now that they have been converted to stubs, I withdraw my nomination as this discussion is not the right venue for articles. ~ GB fan'
• Keep. These redirects serve a purpose and are potential search terms. If "they could plausibly be turned into articles", then let's keep them! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I went ahead and turned these redirects into stubs for further expansion. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @GB fan: Thanks for withdrawing. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• File:More4.svg → File:More4 (logo).svg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by Jon Kolbert with the reason: "unused redirect"; unused and overly generic redirect. FASTILY 07:58, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I'll repost what I wrote in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 24#File:Logo PVV.png, noting that a community discussion regarding file redirects may be due: The instructions for moving a file state, "After moving the file, please replace all uses of the old file link with the new one.", hence all file redirects should be orphaned. The guidance concerning file redirects states, "As when a page is moved, a redirect is left when moving files. In most cases the file redirect should remain on the original page, except if the original name falls under one of the revision deletion criteria (purely disruptive, grossly insulting, privacy breaching, etc.) or shadows a file on Commons."; they shouldn't be suppressed unless they meet one of the criteria for speedy deletion. This means that there are many redirects in existence that are no different than this one (I create them regularly when renaming files), hence I see no reason to delete this one in particular. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 06:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:File redirect.  Paine Ellsworth  ^put'r there  11:16, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 retarget to William Henry Gates. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• William henry gates → Bill Gates  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to William Henry Gates primarily for caps. NasssaNser (^talk/_edits) 04:05, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, this kind of miscapitalization is handled better automatically. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 04:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. Automatic adjustment of capitals only happens for some methods of searching/browsing Wikipedia, other methods will lead to search results, invitations to search or invitations to start a page, none of which are helpful in this case. ((R from other capitalisation)) and ((R from incorrect capitalisation)) are very, very widely used in preference to deletion for exactly this reason. Thryduulf (talk) 09:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  If this was the case it would be advantageous to have bots automatically generate miscapitalized redirects for every article title. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 22:18, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  In most cases where there are multiple capital letters in an article title the lowercase only title should redirect there, however there are enough exceptions (e.g. WP:DIFFCAPS) that a bot could introduce significant errors (see also the well-intentioned eubot). There are also many other cases where additional different capitalisations are also good (e.g. Amy MacDonald (singer) → Amy Macdonald (singer), ) Thryduulf (talk) 10:15, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. The second bullet at WP:R#HARMFUL describes well why this redirect is best kept. It is certainly very old a no harm has come of it; perhaps some good has.--John Cline (talk) 23:45, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:LATINPLEASE → Wikipedia:Username policy#Usernames with non-Latin characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Doesn't make sense, since policy explicitly allows non-Latin characters. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But it explicitly encourages Latin ones in the signature, or at least somewhere Siuenti (씨유엔티) 03:45, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Sieunti is correct that the policy linked does ask for Latin characters in signatures, "To avoid confusion and aid navigation, users with [non-Latin] usernames are encouraged to use Latin characters in their signature.". Thryduulf (talk) 09:14, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: "Please" is an elegant way of conveying the idea that non-latin characters are allowed but latin characters are encouraged. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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