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 soft delete. Thryduulf (talk) 19:40, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned at the target and could potentially be confused with a real carehouse in Scotland called Fordmill Care House. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:52, 12 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep12. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Again, should be retargeted to List of LazyTown episodes. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep12, unambiguous. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per J947. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:11, 19 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep11. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Dr. Rottenstein → LazyTown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I suggest this be retargeted to List of LazyTown episodes, as unlike the other noms, this is the name of an episode. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:49, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep11 per nom. This action could potentially be helpful to readers by leading them to info about this episode (which I assume they're probably searching for). Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 00:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep11, unambiguous. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget as suggested above. --RL0919 (talk) 21:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per above. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:09, 19 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep27. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned at the target. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:47, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep27 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above, I'm mildly surprised this is primary topic but I can't find any other uses. Thryduulf (talk) 19:42, 21 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep10. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:03, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Scotty the Scoutmaster → LazyTown#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep10 where the disguise is mentioned. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per J947. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:08, 19 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep6. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:02, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Sherlock Foams → LazyTown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep6 where the disguise is mentioned. There is an NN company that goes by this name but the term is not ambiguous on-wiki as far as I can tell. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per J947. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:07, 19 February 2021 (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 List of LazyTown episodes#ep2. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned in the target article. Dominicmgm (talk) 23:43, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of LazyTown episodes#ep2 where the disguise is mentioned. I suggest, Dominicmgm, that in future you find these targets (they really aren't hard to find) and retarget the redirects yourself without sending a needless maintenance burden on RfD. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget and endorse J947's points. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:07, 19 February 2021 (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. Thryduulf (talk) 19:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Volcanic Asteroid → Dimension X (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles)#Volcanic Asteroid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Far too vague to be a viable redirect and could also potentially apply to real life (although volcanism on asteroids is not mentioned at Volcanism as far as I can tell). _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:52, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:REDLINK. Ceres, a dwarf planet located in the Asteroid Belt, has cryovolcanoes. 4 Vesta, an asteroid, has had lava and magma, and is not the only asteroid that has. I'm not sure if there's enough material for a Volcanism in asteroids article, but there might be enough for a Geology of asteroids article or a section at List of extraterrestrial volcanoes (which currently doesn't even mention Ceres). Therefore we should redlink until such an article/section is written. (And at the very least, the current destination fails the principle of least astonishment.) -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 05:55, 13 February 2021 (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 Template:R from colloquial name. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:00, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:R slang → Template:R from synonym  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Template:R from slang name → Template:R from alternative name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 9#Template:R from slang term resulted in a retarget of two similar rcats to ((R from colloquial name)); these two should be retargeted there, too. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy retarget. The previous RFD already established a consensus, even if these two specific redirects weren't listed. I think you'd be within your rights to just retarget them yourself and withdraw this. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 05:57, 13 February 2021 (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 OpenStreetMap#Data format. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:58, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Relation (OpenStreetMap) → osmwiki:Relation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely searchterm Fram (talk) 10:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Whoa, I did not even know soft redirects like that were possible. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:27, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @1234qwer1234qwer4: There's a complete list of valid prefixes for other sites here. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I know about the interwiki map, but I did not know one could use it in soft redirects. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, unless there is an appropriate local or sister retarget for this page. The plain ((soft redirect)) template is not used in the mainspace. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 13:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to OpenStreetMap#Data format which describes and explains the OSM usage of relations. Thryduulf (talk) 14:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless an appropriate local target is identified. Soft redirects should not be used for links to external wikis. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 18:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @PEIsquirrel: I identified an appropriate local target immediately above your !vote. Thryduulf (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I saw that, sorry for the confusion. I guess my !vote is really "don't keep". Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 13:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Thryduulf, seems like an appropriate local target that explains the usage of the word. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 10:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to OpenStreetMap#relation (anchor) per Thryduulf. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to anchor per J947 and Thryduulf. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 06:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per above; creating Node (OpenStreetMap) and Way (OpenStreetMap) seems reasonable as well. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:15, 13 February 2021 (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 December 1980#December 8, 1980 (Monday). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:44, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 8 December 1980 → Murder of John Lennon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The date is not synonymous with the incident like how 11 September 2001 is. Dominicmgm (talk) 18:57, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to December 1980#December 8, 1980 (Monday). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) Retarget to December 1980#December 8, 1980 (Monday) which covers all events of that day, including John Lennon's murder. Thryduulf (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per 109.101 and Thryduulf. Polyamorph (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to December 1980#December 8, 1980 (Monday). While the incident is the primary topic, I think that readers searching for information about events on the date will be slightly more helped by the proposed target. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 19:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to December 1980#December 8, 1980 (Monday). John Lennon isn't the primary topic for the day. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 13:16, 17 February 2021 (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 Template:R from birth name. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Redirect from maiden name → Template:R from alternative name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Template:Redirect from unmarried name → Template:R from alternative name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This should redirect to ((R from birth name)), where ((R from maiden name)) also points. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to ((R from birth name)) per nom. Courtesy ping Paine Ellsworth. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:13, 12 February 2021 (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 Template:R from British English. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Redirect from UK spelling → Template:R from alternative spelling  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This should redirect to ((R from British English)). 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to ((R from British English)), seems pretty commonsensical. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:15, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above. Thryduulf (talk) 23:58, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Include both this is a spelling difference, not primarily a usage difference. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 21:10, 15 February 2021 (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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Biden/Harris → Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Biden Harris → Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This could refer to Biden's campaign or his administration. Interstellarity (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I see that Trump Pence, Obama Biden, and Obama/Biden each redirect to campaign articles (and Trump/Pence does not exist). A decision reached in this discussion may also need to be applied to those titles. BD2412 T 17:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: here are the last five administrations; there do not seem to be any comparable links for administrations earlier than that:

Trump Pence, Trump/Pence Trump-Pence

Obama Biden, Obama/Biden, Obama-Biden

Bush Cheney, Bush/Cheney, Bush-Cheney

Clinton Gore, Clinton/Gore, Clinton-Gore

Bush Quayle, Bush/Quayle, Bush-Quayle

Targets of the above redirects are all over the map. BD2412 T 17:28, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per consensus of other links. Also I feel it just makes since. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 22:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • While the other links suggest this should not be deleted they offer no consensus as to the appropriate target. Thryduulf (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've left a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/American politics inviting comments on this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 00:03, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep should all be targeted to the most narrow campaign item that covers the term. And it should be the campaign, because administrations are almost universally known by the president's name, whereas campaigns often have the potential VP's name tagged on. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 09:32, 16 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Keep. The campaign article is the most reasonable target. --RL0919 (talk) 21:18, 18 February 2021 (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 snow keep. BD2412 put it best, not much more to say. El_C 15:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• January 6th → January 6  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Listing for discussion to gauge consensus. There are plenty of days which are synonymous with events, e.g. September 11th , July 4th, December 25th, all redirect to articles on the corresponding day in the Gregorian calendars as these are the primary topics. These then link to specific events. So precedent seems to be to keep the redirect and not to create a disambiguation page. Polyamorph (talk) 15:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep redirect to the day in Gregorian calendar. Polyamorph (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert to disambiguation page. "9/11" redirects to the terrorist attack, so the precedent of "September 11th" is not relevant to this discussion. "January 6th" has become shorthand for 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, especially in the United States, but not exclusively so. A disambiguation page is the best compromise. The target page January 6 has this reference buried as a wl from the word "storm", making it very hard for the user to find it. Art Smart ^Chart/Heart 15:40, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, the solution to a link being buried is to improve the link as this will help everyone. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do we really need the link to the united states capital building there? I would be tempted to turn the entire phrase "storm the United States Capitol" into a link to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Good suggestion, done. Thryduulf (talk) 16:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • (edit conflict) That sounds sensible, there are too many wikilinks for one entry, one is sufficient. Polyamorph (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a redirect to the day page. There is no primary topic for this date - epiphany, the protests and Covid updates are all about equal in my search results. A disambiguation page would just be a subset of the day page so there isn't a need for it. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep at it's current target. There have been repeated attempts to turn this into a DAB page including 2021 storming of the United States Capitol or just retargeting the page to the article on the storming which I disagree with, the clear primary topic of "January 6th" is the 6th day of January. I see no evidence that anyone is referring to the event as "January 6th" alone, all the names I could find including the date were variations like "January 6th capital riots". The event is already listed on the target page (although it could probably be made clearer), so it is already easily accessible to readers. Targeting this to the Storming of the US capital seems to me to be an textbook example of Americentrism and Recentism. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as is, consistently with September 11 (and September 11th), which both refer to the generic date and not to the specific event on that date. I note that September 11 states in the lede that the date is often used to refer to the terrorist attack, which may be appropriate here if a similar usage of the date can be sourced. BD2412 T 17:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as is per above. If I searched up January 6th on Wikipedia, I would expect to land on January 6. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 20:12, 12 February 2021 (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. No prejudice against recreation to WikiProject Christianity if a project member feels it useful. @Chicdat: Narky Blert had already answered your question. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:IX → Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity in India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The related Wikipedia:Ⅸ was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 10#Wikipedia:Ⅸ as not a plausible shortcut as "Ⅸ"/"IX" refers to Christianity in general not India specifically. That redirect used a single unicode character Ⅸ, this one uses the two ascii capital letters IX but is otherwise the same. It's worth noting though that this redirect was created by a different editor and has been around since 2008. Thryduulf (talk) 13:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps it would be worth asking if WikiProject Christianity wants it? They already have WP:X pointing at them and if this is a common way to refer to Christianity it seems like a sensible target. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've left a note on the project talk page linking to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 15:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because of the substantial number of incoming links. Otherwise delete. I oppose the suggested retarget to WikiProject Christianity. They already have WP:X so introducing a new, longer redirect is not helpful. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Copying my argument in the earlier discussion - "IX" is a Greek-letter Christogram (Iesos Christos; I = iota, X = chi), not exclusive to any specific Christian tradition. Narky Blert (talk) 18:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete WP:X is also unnecessary. What do they even stand for? 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:22, 19 February 2021 (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 19:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Arco-flagellation → Warhammer 40,000  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target article or anywhere else on wikipedia. Unused, only 11 page views in the last year. There was an article here but following a 2007 AfD it was merged to another article. In the subsequent 13 years through a series of mergers and edits all content from the article has been removed, leaving this redirect without a target 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: No mention anywhere on Wikipedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:02, 19 February 2021 (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 one, delete other.. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Tijolinho → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Tijolinho (character) → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessarily redirected from a stub to a page without mention instead of being CSDed, but mentioned at Patife Band (EP). Not sure about the "(character)" one though. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:58, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget Tijolinho to Patife Band (EP) as the name of a song on the record, Delete Tijolinho (character) as a non notable character without mention in the encyclopedia. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:29, 12 February 2021 (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 19:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Prince Kravik → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Risal Singh Ahir → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Hellene Devil Girl from Hell → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Mr. ask → Character (arts)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Following Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 2#Charly Putoznwschvtzky, here are some more pages redirected from CSD-able stubs by Lord Opeth instead of being speedily deleted. They are neither mentioned at the target nor anywhere else on Wikipedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:51, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Prince Kravik appears to be a DC comics character, and is mentioned at Nightwing#Story arcs but not by name. Maybe retarget there?

Delete The other 3 as they appear to be non-notable characters without mention in the encyclopedia, and the current target is completely unhelpful. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. Anyone searching for a specific character name is not going to expect to go to a general article like this that does mention the character. --RL0919 (talk) 17:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per RL0919. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:17, 14 February 2021 (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 19:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Almost no pageviews. AKK700 08:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. The Q and A keys are next to each other on a QWERTY keyboard, and someone might mix them up, although I'm not sure if this is very common. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 16:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No more or less likely than any other transposition of letters and the page views (13 last year) and google results don't indicate this is a particularly notable or especially common mistake (search results are almost identical for this and "Copmaq" for example, excluding a non-notable quality assurance company CompQA.) Thryduulf (talk) 16:43, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Thryduulf. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2021 (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 Latin alphabet. (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:46, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ → Latin script  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz → Latin script  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible redirect. Most people are going to type "English Alphabet" like normal people. Aasim (talk) 02:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Holy sh*t! To call it the ABC is certainly OK, but ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ is a word of 30 syllables or so. That's not English-Scottish-Welsh-Irish-American-Canadian-Australian-New Zealandian-South African. Love —LiliCharlie (talk) 03:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I would like to point out that about a year ago there was a consensus to have the target redirect here Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 11#Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz. Do you believe that something has changed since that discussion?--65.92.160.124 (talk) 04:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget (edit conflict) to Latin alphabet (slightly better target in my opinion). Contrary to the nominator, I believe this to be an exceedingly plausible string of letters and the pageview stats bear that out. There are those who use this redirect as an odd way of searching up the alphabet – a redirect being odd is not a reason to delete it. Redirects should cater to all ways of searching as they are by and large harmless. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Latin alphabet per above. This got 2600 page views in the last year, so it's clearly not an implausible search term. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 10:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F7quI-MbzY even uses this as a word by the way. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note I've added Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz to the nomination as they should not lead to different places, indeed one should likely be marked as a ((R avoided double redirect)) of the other. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Retarget to Latin alphabet, but definitely DON'T DELETE. While seemingly a bit odd, it's clearly not an implausible search term in the slightest, garnering over 2,600 page views in the last year. Paintspot Infez (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Latin alphabet. BD2412 T 17:22, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Latin alphabet per others. Seems like this should have been suggested at previous discussions but oh well. No serious reason for deleting has been given. The "normal people" searching English Alphabet aren't going to be taken to Latin script anyway, obviously, since English alphabet is an article. A7V2 (talk) 09:47, 13 February 2021 (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 19:39, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Julia (actress) → Julia Roberts  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The base "Julia (actress)" redirect in the TRAINWRECKED discussion a few days ago. It can refer to legions of actresses named Julia (like Roberts and the other 21 listed on Julia), notable and non-notable. Although I'm leaning towards deleting it, if kept, it should be retargeted to Julia. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 02:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Julia Roberts does not seem to be known by her first name alone, a google search for "Julia (actress)" turns up a range of different people. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I can find no evidence that any actress is known mononymously as Julia. Thryduulf (talk) 13:37, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and others have said. -Kj cheetham (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There are no mononymic actresses on Julia (disambiguation), so that's not a suitable target. Hopelessly ambiguous. Narky Blert (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is no primary topic for Julia (actress) 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:24, 19 February 2021 (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.