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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:46, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 → Googol  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete Very unlikely natural search term given its length. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, given this is what a googol is. It's plausible via copy and paste, or if someone knows that 1 + 100 zeros has a special name, but doesn't know what that name is. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per tavix. Thryduulf (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. --B dash (talk) 02:37, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per those above. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep this one per above. Ben5218 (talk) 03:30, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I'll take Tavix's word that the redirect contains 100 zeroes ... because of it does, the redirect is accurate and helpful. Steel1943 (talk) 12:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I counted the zeros and its accurate (and helpful). Rlendog (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - WP is not a search engine. If someone has a long number they want to know about, they can try a search engine. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 02:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• So you want people to use Google to find Googol? -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• ...Ba dum tiss. Steel1943 (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Page Curation. → Wikipedia:Page Curation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete Apparently originally created in error; full stop makes this an unlikely search term. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:02, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per full stop. Steel1943 (talk) 12:58, 16 January 2019 (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 speedy deleted per WP:G6: "deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace." -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:2019 in basketball → 2019 in basketball  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Cross-namespace redirect that appears to have been created due to an erroneous move from draftspace. Smartyllama (talk) 18:26, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete to correct previous error. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete - was created in error. Rikster2 (talk) 18:34, 15 January 2019 (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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ladyboy sometimes means an offensive term of Shemale. Sharouser (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, there is another synonym. See Lady Boy (song). Sharouser (talk) 15:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep this points to the primary topic for the term, the song is already linked from a hatnote and one can be added to shemale if required. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as primary topic. [1] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:33, 17 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per WP:RDAB: malformed (no space). UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RDAB. Steel1943 (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RDAB. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:07, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RDAB. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:46, 16 January 2019 (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 retarget to Voltron (1984 TV series). (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Voltron: Defender of the Universe → Voltron#New projects  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Currently Voltron: Defender of the Universe redirects to Voltron. The Voltron article specifically talks about Voltron as a media franchise and the multiple versions while the Voltron (1984 TV series) specially talks about the 1984 cartoon version Voltron: Defender of the Universe is the actual name of the first season of the 1984 version that is the reason why I believe that Voltron: Defender of the Universe should be redirected to Voltron (1984 TV series). )) Dwanyewest (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2019 (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 retarget to Voltron (1984 TV series). (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Vehicle Voltron → Voltron#Vehicle Voltron (Voltron of the Near Universe)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Currently Vehicle Voltron redirects to Voltron. The Voltron article specifically talks about Voltron as a media franchise and the multiple versions while the Voltron (1984 TV series) specially talks about the 1984 cartoon version and the second season of the 1984 version was referred to as Vehicle Voltron that is the reason why I believe that Vehicle voltron should be redirected to Voltron (1984 TV series). Dwanyewest (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:13, 15 January 2019 (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 retarget to Beast King GoLion. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:49, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Go-Lion → Voltron  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no reason Go-Lion should redirect toVoltron when Go Lion redirects to Beast King GoLion its a minor difference in spelling. Go-Lion should redirect to Beast King GoLion Dwanyewest (talk) 13:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:12, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget as Golion goes there as well. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:35, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget someone typing this in is certainly looking for the show Voltorn was based on.--67.68.28.220 (talk) 04:21, 17 January 2019 (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. Deryck C. 17:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Castlevania character → Template:Infobox character  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused redirect and not following the convention of prefixing by "infobox". Gonnym (talk) 11:55, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:46, 15 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:11, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Sdesc → Template:Short description  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a template redirect, a shortcut intended to save typing during the large-scale project of adding short descriptions to ultimately all articles in Wikipedia. However, Gonnym appears not to like this shortcut and has removed the links to it from the project pages Short description and WikiProject Short descriptions. As a shortcut is of little value if no-one knows about it, should this template shortcut be kept (and the links reinstated), or deleted? : Bhunacat10 (talk), 10:59, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Support deletion Seeing a trend the past few years of templates moving from short, unreadable titles, to clear full word/sentence titles, which I personally agree with, I see no value in having a template, which is used only once per page, be cryptic. If this were a template which was used a lot on the page, I could see some value in the arguments for it saving time, but since it is used only once, better for it to stay clear and let editors know what it is, without them needing to click the redirect. --Gonnym (talk) 11:10, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support deletion ((short description)) is clearer in the wikitext; only benefit would be to save typing but one should be using User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper anyhow :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support deletion per Galobtter. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:22, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Please delete There is enough confusion about the strange squiggles at the top of many articles without adding another layer of obfuscation. A good example of useful obscurity is ((dda)) which is a redirect to ((death date and age)); the shortcut is useful in tables listing dozens of people along with birth/death dates. However, ((death date and age)) should be used when it appears only once in an infobox. Johnuniq (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Happy for this to go as we also have ((SHD)) and ((Short desc)). (I hadn't known about these, as until yesterday they weren't categorised nor shown as shortcuts on the main template page). However, if "cryptic" shortcut templates in general are now to be deprecated, this deserves a general discussion and guidance not to make new ones: no-one has yet deleted other frequently used one-per-page template shortcuts such as ((Rip)) or ((Ccat)): Bhunacat10 (talk), 11:34, 22 January 2019 (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. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:16, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Cornelia Maria Catharina Andreoli → Draft:Cornelia Maria Catharina Andreoli  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

from a page moved back to draft - written in Dutch, not appropriate for en.wiki PamD 10:50, 15 January 2019 (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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Inkotanyi → Rwandan Patriotic Front  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article, though creation edit summary says "Ishyaka FPR-Inkotanyi in kinyarwanda language" - please add this info with a source. PamD 10:37, 15 January 2019 (UTC)- edited my own garbled text for clarity. PamD 17:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is verifiable with a 10 second google search - the official website is http://rpfinkotanyi.rw and many pages there refer to the party as "RPF-INKOTANYI" (e.g. [2], [3]). Thryduulf (talk) 01:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Thryduulf's points. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 11:31, 16 January 2019 (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 no longer a redirect. Restored the pre-redirected version: belongs at TfD, not RfD (non-admin closure) UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Television companies of the United States → Television in the United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused, newly-created template. Cabayi (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:49, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED → Ircon International  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

We don't need redirects from capitalised version of every company name. PamD 10:23, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:RCAPS. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NCCORP. Cabayi (talk) 17:08, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as an unlikely search term. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 11:30, 16 January 2019 (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 speedy deleted per WP:G5. Reesebubble is a sock of Boyhoodjams. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:20, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Princess Changge → Romance novel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of the term in target article. PamD 10:04, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:15, 15 January 2019 (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 no consensus. This may be reconsidered should an article or articles be created on other groups. As for Jewish Avengers, I will add a hatnote to Goel for now. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:13, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Nokmim → Nakam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Nokim → Nakam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Jewish Avengers → Nakam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nokmim is the Hebrew word for "Avengers", it was the name of several Jewish partisan groups in Eastern Europe during the Holocaust, none of which were directly related to the later Nakam group that tried to get revenge. Delete per WP:REDLINK. Catrìona (talk) 19:00, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the interwikis, the Hebrew wiki link is for HaNokmim, "organized the final stages of World War II and thereafter" -- which would appear to be the relevant concept for this redirect. If User:Catrìona is correct that Nakam should be identified as a different concept, then a new item for it should be created on Wikidata, and the various current sitelinks be assigned to one or the other appropriately. It might be worth starting a new stub here (perhaps based on a translation of the he-wiki article), that these present redirects could be updated to point to. The subject does appear significant. Jheald (talk) 18:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jheald: The hewiki article on "HaNokmim" actually discusses two separate groups, Nakam and Tilhas Tizig Gesheften, both of which already have enwiki articles. A dab page is a possible solution, but the phrase "(Jewish) Avengers" is probably too vague for a separate dab page from Avenger, considering that across history there are many Jews who have sought revenge for various offenses. And I don't think it would make sense to redirect "Jewish Avengers" or a Hebrew word for Avenger to that dab page, per Wikipedia:Redirects from foreign languages. Catrìona (talk) 18:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Catrìona: So, probably makes sense to create a stub-dab at Nokmim (or at one of the terms being discussed), that would pick up incoming interwiki clicks and appropriately dab them. No opinion as to whether it would make sense to include a link from Avenger to that new page, but you may be right that it might be too niche a meaning. Jheald (talk) 18:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it makes sense to keep Nokmim as stub or dab just for interwiki purposes: the Czech, German, Romanian and Spanish interwiki articles are all about Nakam itself. Besides, as stated above, Nokmim was the name of several Jewish partisan brigades during the Holocaust itself. Catrìona (talk) 18:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or disambiguate "Nokmim" and "Nokim"; disambiguate "Jewish avenger" or hatnote to Goel. The Modern Hebrew name for this group he:הנוקמים transliterates to haNokmim (pl.), i.e. Nokmim (pl.) and Nok(i)m (sg.). If we don't have information about the other Nokmim on the English Wikipedia, then Nakam stands as the primary topic. If we do, a disambiguation page would be appropriate. As for "Jewish avenger", this can also refer to Goel (i.e. "avenger of blood") so disambiguation would be appropriate, whether by a standalone disambiguation page or by a hatnote. Deryck C. 19:13, 3 January 2019 (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 retarget to Network for the Promotion of Asian Cinema. as an alternative to deletion. Deryck C. 17:27, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Warsaw Film Festival NETPAC Award for Best Asian Film → Warsaw International Film Festival  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 20:58, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Network for the Promotion of Asian Cinema (NETPAC). It's not specific to the Warsaw festival, but this would get people to the article that mentions all the venues in which NETPAC awards have been given as well as the actual recipients which is probably what the searcher wants. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:41, 7 January 2019 (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. We seem to have consensus against both targets. Deryck C. 17:26, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Witches' Church → Santiago de Compostela Cathedral  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible search term, not mentioned in target buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 20:52, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wiccan church as a possible term. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:34, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose retargeting to Wiccan church as Wicca is not the only religion with witches. feminist (talk) 01:59, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:27, 15 January 2019 (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 retarget to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Votes for sanction → Wikipedia:Requests for comment  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This isn't really a useful redirect as there hasn't been ever been voting for sanction in the first place when I look at the history of this redirect. There were only 5 pageviews over the past year which suggests that this redirect isn't really useful. Pkbwcgs (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct. There is useful history to this redirect that is worth keeping and RFC/U was the process this idea related to. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Thryduulf · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:29, 15 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Storm of a lifetime → Hurricane Florence  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It can also referred to a book "The Storm of a Lifetime: A Report to U.S. Catholic Bishops and Pope Francis" in 2016, or other notable storms B dash (talk) 04:54, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not mentioned at target and after about a minute of searching I found instances of this name being used for Hurricane Michael, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Camille, among others. —Xezbeth (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom and the fact that the storm of a lifetime is subjective. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 16:51, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all above. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as this could be any number of storms such as Maria, Harvey, etc.. Noah^Talk 19:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as is vague. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:16, 15 January 2019 (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 retarget to Hurricane Michael (disambiguation). MBisanz ^talk 01:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Post-Tropical Cyclone Michael → Hurricane Michael  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Michael in 2000 also became post-tropical B dash (talk) 04:51, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep, considering that the current target is the "de facto" WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for this redirect, considering that the target is currently named "Hurricane Michael" and not "Hurricane Michael (2018)". A possible resolution may be to create Post-Tropical Cyclone Michael (2000) as a redirect and have it target Hurricane Michael (2000). Steel1943 (talk) 05:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, there is no WP:PTOPIC for Michael. Both 2000 and the 2018 has caused some impact. --219.79.96.94 (talk) 15:44, 21 January 2019 (UTC)— 219.79.96.94 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• I strongly disagree with you. Obviously the 2018 incarnation of Michael is the primary topic. It caused over $15 billion in damages and killed 60 people, whereas the 2000 has unknown damages (minimal) and killed nobody. Noah^Talk 01:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Hurricane Michael (disambiguation) - All known Michaels have gone through the post-tropical phase. Nova Crystallis (Talk) 01:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I seriously doubt that anyone would be looking for Post-Tropical Cyclone Michael as opposed to Hurricane Michael. Jason Rees (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The 2018 storm is the primary topic, and I don't see reason to be believe there would be a different primary topic specifically for the post-tropical phase of the storm. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Hurricane Michael (disambiguation) with no primary topic at the post-tropical cyclone stage, given the 2000 incarnation impacted Canada while post-tropical and 2018 incarnation is mainly known for its time as a tropical cyclone. ~ KN2731 {t · c} 11:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Hurricane Michael (disambiguation): it should not be assumed that the user is looking for the 2018 storm, as there were certainly other post-tropical cyclones with the same name that caused significant damage. Hdjensofjfnen (♪ Oh, can I get a connection? Alternatively, trout me.) 20:23, 23 January 2019 (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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Crate Amplifiers → LOUD Technologies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

suggest deletion or other more relevant redirect. It appears that Crate Amplifiers are no longer in production, and there is no article currently for the parent company most relevant to the topic (St Louis Music). synthfiend (talk) 20:22, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep company is mentioned in the target article, a minimum requirement for redirects; see LOUD Technologies#More acquisitions and divestments. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 17:29, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and refine to LOUD_Technologies#More_acquisitions_and_divestments. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:18, 15 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirects are cheap → Wikipedia:Redirects are cheap  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete This cross-namespace redirect was created to make a point, according to the edit summary. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unnecessary and confusing cross-namespace redirect to an essay page. Steel1943 (talk) 04:34, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because 1) redirects are cheap after all and 2) I'll recreate it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...and 2) I'll recreate it."??? If there's consensus to delete this, a recreation of it will be eligible for speedy deletion criterion G4. Unless you intend to get the title WP:SALT-ed due to continuous recreations, I'm not clear what purpose that part of your comment served. Steel1943 (talk) 06:29, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The purpose is that redirects are clearly not cheap as this discussion shows. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I like it. Not sure who would be confused by it. Whatever you do, do not retarget to a mainspace page because that would be confusing. —Kusma (t·c) 10:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - A user essay does not merit its own article - not even as a redirect. Cabayi (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While the joke might have been amusing for a short while, an unused POINT violation has no purpose and should be deleted. Johnuniq (talk) 04:14, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only joke is that redirects are cheap is a policy adhered to when it's convenient for some. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as an unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 11:33, 16 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect stock theatre → Repertory theatre  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete "Redirect" should not be part of the article title UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Implausible typo - a WP:R3 if it weren't for its age. Cabayi (talk) 17:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as implausible search term. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:34, 17 January 2019 (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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:48, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Imperial Japanese Air Force → Japan Air Self-Defense Force  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete redirect, as no such thing ever existed in history. BilCat (talk) 03:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If so, Lanzhou should be updated. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:37, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It should be changed regardless, but I don't know if it was bombed by the IJAAS or IJNAS. It certainly wasn't bombed by the Japan Air Self-Defense Force, which is where this currently redirects to. - BilCat (talk) 11:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or disambiguate between the two imperial-era air forces. Redirecting to the modern equivalent makes no sense. —Kusma (t·c) 14:58, 18 January 2019 (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.