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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Civil fraternal order → Fraternity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This phrase is totally unused on Wikipedia. Whatever a reader using it is looking for, it's probably something more specific. BDD (talk) 20:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created this redirect as a replacement for a piped link in ((Phaleristics)). Howevr, the entry was removed from the template some time ago, so the redirect is no longer necessary. Colonies Chris (talk) 20:13, 9 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Commissioner of Justice → Rivers State Ministry of Justice  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Commissioner of Justice" is a generic title. It is not specific to Rivers State. So, for example, I cannot add a wikilink from Aisha Dikko (Commissioner of Justice for Kaduna State) to Commissioner of Justice because it is redirecting to a different state. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 19:57, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:REDLINK. Note that European Commission has a Commissioner for Justice, when an article is written the two should be linked by reciprocal hatnotes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per redlink and Thryduulf BlackholeWA (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2020 (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:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:18, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:MOSCOLOR → Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Color coding  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should redirect to MOS:COLOR. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 17:37, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color to conform with MOS:COLOR. Existed since 2007, but only 44 uses (so this won't do much in regard to existing links). — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 07:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Regarget to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color to agree with MOS:COLOR, which I think it was the nom meant. If anyone cares about existing links, they can just be pipe-changed. But that would probably be a waste of time, because Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Color coding is just a summary of the more detailed material at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color, anyway.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  01:09, 12 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Prey (2017 film) → Prey (2019 American film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no 2017 film named "Prey". However, there is a game released in the same year with the same name, but I am not sure if we should retarget this page there, because I assume that there wasn't another film based on that game. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 17:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete no film was released under that name in 2017 and it’s a virtual certainty that someone looking for the game wouldn’t type that as a search term.--65.92.160.124 (talk) 23:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The article does not indicate why (2017 film) might redirect here, and I can see no other 2017 film with that title. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:24, 11 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Prey (upcoming film) → Prey (2019 American film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• The Secret Garden (upcoming film) → The Secret Garden (2020 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Utopia (upcoming TV series) → Utopia (2020 TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Those series are no longer upcoming. They were already released. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all - I doubt if anyone will query for upcoming series.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 17:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as they all are no longer upcoming and moved already. — YoungForever^(talk) 17:38, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. Make space for any future upcoming films or series. Narky Blert (talk) 19:35, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per above. Why would they still be "upcoming" when they've already been released? They can always be recreated if other movie, TV show, etc. with those titles are announced. Regards, SONIC678 16:49, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as no longer upcoming. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:31, 11 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:17, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Bionicle in Japan → Bionicle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The article targeted doesn't even mention Japan. Dominicmgm (talk) 16:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, since given the current target "in Japan" is superfluous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:36, 11 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The solar eclipse that takes place on August 21, 2017 → Solar eclipse of August 21, 2017  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

delete No longer likely to be used / wordy. Facts707 (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Plausible search term, just the mere fact of it being wordy is not enough to warrant deletion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - No reason to delete. It's correct and unambiguous. Hog Farm _Bacon 14:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this redirect does seem implausible—not necessarily due to its length but it just does not seem like a natural search term to me. I feel like it is mainly due to the fact that the tense is incorrect now that the event has passed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, implausible redirect, for several reasons, unused in wikipedia to be retained for hstory. Staszek Lem (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Tavix. --BDD (talk) 18:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Who is going to be searching like this three years after it occurred? Narky Blert (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Incorrect tense and about an event receding into the past. Jessamyn (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Redirect page only received a few amount of page views since April 2019. I mean, who even types this right now? Seventyfiveyears (talk) 11:32, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per CycloneYoris and Hog Farm. "Unecessary" is not a reason to delete a redirect that is correct, unambiguous and harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 17:11, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Unnecessary redirect, long after the fact, and incorrect tense too. Maybe this topic should be served by Google. Jax MN (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2020 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Chapter 10: The Confrontation → The Mandalorian (season 2)#ep10  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was a speculated title for the episode "Chapter 10: The Passenger". Since the title is incorrect, it is highly unlikely that people will actually use this redirect. Aoba47 (talk) 02:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 03:08, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. - Brojam (talk) 03:44, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nominator. Justarandomamerican (talk) 14:36, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. "Confrontation" is not mentioned at the target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --TheVampire (talk) 15:25, 15 November 2020 (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) 21:09, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The Field of Aquatic Science → Aquatic science  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very unlikely search term. I assume we normally avoid prefacing topics with such modifiers? (the planet of Mars, the holiday of Christmas...) - Would need a histmerge though if deleted. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:15, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget - agreed that Aquatic science is the more appropriate search term. The creator of the page and most contributions to the article is from a student editor, User:Dsarah15, and we should make sure their substantial contributions aren't lost in the merger, or are added back in at a later date to Aquatic science article. Jayzlimno (talk) 13:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the student draft back to their sandbox and I will give them some feedback on how to proceed properly. Guettarda (talk) 14:30, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• What happened here? The history only shows it ever redirecting to the current target, so the "retarget" vote above doesn't make sense to me. But it also says the first edit removed almost 14,000 characters, which makes no sense. As an admin, I should be able to see deleted edits. --BDD (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @BDD: When you're in the history, click "View logs for this page" and it will take you to All public logs for the page. There, you can see that Guettarda performed a history split to User:Dsarah15/sandbox. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• So given the above history split, my take is that it's safe to delete? I'd probably have ignored this redirect as harmless if useless, but at this point the discussion needs closure. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete recently created, seems to have never existed in any form prior to 14 September 2020, and only very recently in its current form. Not common enough or old enough to warrant keeping. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:41, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom.--Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 11:17, 17 November 2020 (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 delete per WP:CSD#G7 as the nominator is the redirect's creator. Thryduulf (talk) 12:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Second inauguration of Donald Trump → Inauguration of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, for obvious reasons. KidAd talk 01:19, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:26, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Unless I'm mistaken, as User:KidAd is the creator and has nominated for deletion this should be speedily deleted? If not, delete per nom. A7V2 (talk) 05:25, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, of course sam1370 (talk · contribs) 07:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @KidAd: for future reference, if you want a page you created and are the sole significant editor of to be deleted you can just add ((G7)) to the top. Thryduulf (talk) 12:41, 9 November 2020 (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. Consensus to keep the article for now although notability may be challenged via the usual processes. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 15:24, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Trent Sullivan → H2O: Just Add Water  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, based on a prior revision this appears to be the name of a child actor with a minor role in the show. Delete unless a duly sourced mention can be added. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:55, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Sullivan was definitely a recurring actor on H2O: Just Add Water: IIRC, he played Emma's little brother, and was in roughly a dozen episodes. I have no opinion on whether the redirect is worthy of keeping, but if it is, H2O: Just Add Water is the logical destination. If it's kept, I would suggest that Sullivan should be added to the 'Supporting' section at H2O: Just Add Water in some capacity (i.e. if not in the bulleted-list then in prose below the list). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Note: Due to this discussion, Sullivan, and other family members of the characters, have been added (back?) to H2O: Just Add Water. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 12:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Its not clear that the recent inclusion of Sullivan in the target's text is actually DUE. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:01, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment the name remains in the article at this point. If Rosguill or anyone else thinks it shouldn't be (for DUE or any other reason) then that should be discussed on the article talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 12:43, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - redirect was converted to an article some time ago now (30th Oct), so there's no need to continue this discussion (although I'm not sure the article would survive AFD). A7V2 (talk) 04:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Accept article. I think the right thing to do would have been for @Temuera: to have drafted an article underneath the RfD notice and not to remove the RfD notice. Nevertheless, the article is there now and is an acceptable alternative. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:18, 11 November 2020 (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. This is fairly numerically split between deletion (as unlikely, ungrammatical, and/or ambiguous) or as a retarget to Hash list. Given the only real elaborated argument for retargeting to Hash list is based on it containing "list of hashes" in the first sentence, I can't help but find that argument unconvincing - we're retargeting List of hash not List of hashes, which already targets a different page. Given this seems to have caused confusion via ambiguity in this very discussion, I can't help but find the argument that it's ambiguous to be the stronger one, and find the consensus leans that way. ~ mazca ^talk 00:31, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• List of hash → List of hash functions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Hash has many possible meanings, and this strikes me as an unlikely way to look for the target. I suggest deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:33, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 19:06, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it is ungrammatical and folk looking for the CS data structure would search for list of hashes, for which the redirect already exists. --((u|Mark viking)) {Talk} 19:33, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Hash list which includes list of hashes in the first sentence. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete given that List of hashes exists. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per AngusWOOF. Thryduulf (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Nom comment I'm opposed to the current retargeting proposal: Hash list is a data type that stores hashes (that will generally all be produced using the same function) whereas List of hashes is a list of hash functions used to generate the hashes used in a hash list. I still think deletion is the way to go, but I think keeping the status quo is preferable to the retarget suggestion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as ambiguous. I'd be expecting to be looking at a list article about cannabis resin ("hash" in British English). Narky Blert (talk)
• Retarget to Hash list per above. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to Hash list. I don't envy the closer here, hence my taking myself out of consideration! I can definitely live with either outcome here. I don't see anything else this would refer to, but it doesn't seem super helpful, especially with List of hashes available. --BDD (talk) 21:07, 17 November 2020 (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.