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 G6, obviously created in error. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Micro ribbon=edit → Micro ribbon connector  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Even though this is from 2005, I don't think there is any value in keeping this around, especially in mainspace. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• delete from history it is seen an obvious error, maybe of some script Lembit Staan (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete as confusing --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:31, 11 March 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 speedy deleted per G6, obviously created in error. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• MEDEVAC target= → Medical evacuation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target does not mention any "target", let alone with an equals sign. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• delete from history it is seen an obvious error, maybe of some script Lembit Staan (talk) 00:46, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete - I agree, just seems like an error when it was created. - Ahunt (talk) 13:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:06, 11 March 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 speedy deleted per G2 by Plastikspork. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:49, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:From Here to Eternityaction=edit → Template:Jones war trilogy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Erroneously created under this title and moved less than a minute later. No need for this redirect. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy G6 Obviously created in error. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy G6 Unambiguously in error. Hog Farm _Talk 22:01, 8 March 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 speedy deleted per G2 by Plastikspork. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Current Montgomery County Council (Maryland)=edit → Template:Current Montgomery County Council (Maryland)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Erroneously created under this title and moved three minutes later. No need to have this. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy G6 Obviously created in error. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:21, 8 March 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. --BDD (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Rod (geometry) → Cylinder  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The Rod (geometry) redirects to Cylinder, but the target page does never even mention the term rod, let alone describing it or even defining it. As such, the redirect is clearly misleading. Hence either the redirect should be deleted or reverted to a stub version, or the target article should be expanded to cover the redirected notion. CiaPan (talk) 20:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There's also the Rod (shaft) redirect, should that be bundled into this nomination? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:27, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I put up Rod (shaft) for discussion following the suggestion: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_9#Rod_(shaft). (I put it up separately because they weren't nominated at the same time, and also because it was easier that way with Twinkle for me. Not sure if it was more proper to have them separate or combine them here.) Adumbrativus (talk) 06:17, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Rod has no real technical meaning in geometry. The old stub claimed that "In geometry, a rod is a three-dimensional, solid (filled) cylinder", but it gave no sources, and it's not a standard definition or even a noteworthy uncommon definition. If "rod" were to get a mention in Cylinder, it would at most be an informal example of familiar cylinder-like objects, like the way a tin can is used as an example there currently—but that's no reason for a "Tin can (geometry)" either. Adumbrativus (talk) 08:18, 9 March 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 18:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• File:Conservative logo 2006.svg → File:Conservatives logo.svg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misleading; the file has been moved and updated so it currently is no longer the 2006 version of the logo. No incoming file links. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:12, 8 March 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 Color. There's been full agreement with the basis of the nomination, that these two spelling variations ought to go to the same place. Once we accept that, it's clear that any of the suggested targets are completely reasonable - the singular, the disambiguation page, or the list of colors would all be completely valid targets for these. It seems therefore best to go for the most popular option in this discussion, the singular, which is also broadly supported as the default in WP:PLURALPT. ~ mazca ^talk 14:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Colors → Color (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

I'm pretty sure that these ought to go to the same place. Which is better? I've looked at a number of other pairs of colo(u)r page titles (multicolor, colourful, etc.), and every pair goes to the same place, except for colored and coloured, which are distinct articles covering different topics. Nyttend (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Support 'color', color seems the obvious redirect for all spellings. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:37, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Colors to Color, consistent with Colours, per WP:PLURALPT: "the normal situation is that a plural redirects to its singular". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Colours to Color (disambiguation). Despite WP:PLURALPT, it may not have a primary topic and may be better retargeted to the dab. I just worked through the incoming links to Colours. Most of them did not relate to Color, the most popular correction being Military colours. Certes (talk) 22:41, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Certes: But "colours" in the context of Military colours, standards and guidons is just a plural of "colour". Clearly linking to Color when you mean "military colour" or "military colours" is an error, but I think it's a stretch to say that there is no primary topic for "Colours". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:24, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's not a normal plural because the singular "military colo[u]r" is rare. It's more like Browns or Greens where extra meanings such as Cleveland Browns‎ and Greens (vegetable) make the plural more ambiguous than the singular. Certes (talk) 16:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget Colours to Color (disambiguation) per Certes. In particular, the reference to military colors/colours necessitates disambiguation for the plural forms, and I don't think targeting the singular with a hatnote is preferable, though I would be open to that. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:51, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Colors to Color per Shhhnotsoloud. "Color" is the singular form and primary topic for both "Colors" and "Colours". Seventyfiveyears (talk) 12:03, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Keeping my vote above, but another possibility to consider would be to retarget to List of colors, since many searchers may be seeking that content. Would be analogous to, for example, Presidents of the United States targeting List of presidents of the United States and not President of the United States. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Colors to Color. While it's certainly possible to talk about a single color, the scientific topic is really about multiple colors anyway. --BDD (talk) 01:25, 22 March 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 American Civil War#Secession crisis. --BDD (talk) 01:13, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Secession crisis of 1860-61 → United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This does not refer to just the United States. I recommend retargeting this to American Civil War. CrazyBoy826 22:22, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

retargeting this to American Civil War. = good idea. Rjensen (talk) 22:28, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Reverted to where it redirected before being inexplicably mangled (double redirect to Confederate_States_of_America#Secession). I'm not saying that's the best fix (the previous section might be better), but it gets back to something plausible at least. Please review and see. Dicklyon (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Confederate_States_of_America#Secession per Dicklyon - This should have the same target as Secession crisis of 1860–61, which was always Confederate_States_of_America#Secession except briefly to United States which was quickly reverted. If there is a better target then both redirects should point to the same article. A7V2 (talk) 08:44, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget both to American Civil War#Secession crisis, which I think does a slightly better job of explaining this than the material at the CSA target. Hog Farm _Talk 14:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget both to American Civil War#Secession crisis per Hog Farm. I agree the section at the Civil War article better captures the specific topic envisaged by this redirect, as the CSA did not exist in 1860. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:39, 10 March 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 X rating. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• X ratings → CD-ROM  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Too ambiguous to refer to CD-ROMs. It could also refer to the X rating used in some motion pictures. Dominicmgm (talk) 19:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to X rating as the most plausible target --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to X rating as an ((R from plural)) per Lenticel. While there are "x"-ratings for CD-ROMs, it's kinda confusing to have the singular and plural redirect to different targets here. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:31, 9 March 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 18:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hair Fairies (people) → Transgender  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 02:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably delete as an unlikely search term with this capitalization and parenthetical, and as a questionable target. "Hair fairies" is (as mentioned in various RS) an older term for a category of gay queens, some (perhaps even many) of whom were trans women, but it is unclear that "Transgender" is unambiguously the right target for a redirect about that. "Hair fairies" are already briefly mentioned in San Francisco Pride, and if someone is feeling energetic, they could probably add a sentence to an article like LGBT history which could make a better target(?). (I found enough uses of the term to meet Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion as a dictionary entry, though; revise if needed.) -sche (talk) 06:26, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• If there is usage in reliable sources then I would think that it would be best to add an entry to List of LGBT slang terms and retarget this there. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 10:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  True, that would also work. -sche (talk) 22:43, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – unused, implausible, derogatory, and over-capitalized to boot. Dicklyon (talk) 00:39, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per the usage in reliable sources this is neither implausible nor derogatory - it is a (now obsolete) self-description. It received almost 60 hits last year so it isn't unused and the capitalisation is trivial. Thryduulf (talk) 05:09, 6 March 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 Mauricio Pineda (footballer, born 1975). Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:08, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Héctor Pineda → Mauricio Pineda  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Hector Pineda → Mauricio Pineda  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The original target was Mauricio Pineda (footballer, born 1975), whose full name is Mauricio Héctor Pineda. There is however no indication that this person is ever referred to as Héctor Pineda. There seems to be no other suitable target. Lennart97 (talk) 14:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Mauricio Pineda (footballer, born 1975). The page is short on valid sources but the top External link has him as "Héctor Mauricio Pineda". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Mauricio Pineda (footballer, born 1975) per the above. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:24, 16 March 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 18:50, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• You're just a sad song → The Black Parade  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Created as a redirect to a redirect, repointed to the same target where there is no mention of sad song in any format. If it is a song, then it the capitalisation is wrong. No assistance to navigation. Richhoncho (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: This is the starting line of the chorus of "Disenchanted" (see https://www.metrolyrics.com/disenchanted-lyrics-my-chemical-romance.html). What do you do when it is not the song's title but more recognised than the actual title which appears nowhere in the lyrics? Kailash29792 (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's reasonable to assume one would type the most recognisable lyric to a song where the title isn't in the lyrics. Just look at Galileo Galileo Galileo Galileo and Today I don't feel like doing anything. Dominicmgm (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dominicmgm. In both the examples you have given there are substantial articles about the song. In this case there is no article for the song. --Richhoncho (talk) 17:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per above. Helpful redirect which is meant to aid readers who are searching for the song. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:23, 16 March 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 disambiguate / set-index-ify. --BDD (talk) 14:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Sayuki → Fiona Graham  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Starting this RFD per a suggestion received at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect#Sayuki redirect. Basically Sayuki was redirected to Fiona Graham back in 2011 as part of a page move. "Sayuki" is Graham's professional geisha name and apparently someone tried to create a separate article about Graham as "Sayuki" instead of incorporating such content into the BLP about Graham. The "Sayuki" article content was eventually merged into the Graham article and the redirect was created as part of the post merge cleanup. The problem is (in my opinion) is that "Sayuki" is a relatively common Japanese female given name and it seems a bit odd for it to automatically redirect to the BLP of a single person. In seems much better to for the newly created redirect Sayuki (geisha) to be for Graham article and for "Sayuki" to instead be converted into a dab page/article like is done for some other Japanese female given names (e.g. Mika, Mayumi (name), Akiko (given name)). I'm not too familiar with redirects and not sure if it's OK to just be bold and do this; so, I'm bringing it up for discussion here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:09, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate / setindexify per nom. Seems like the best solution for common names. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Make a disambig page: All pages with titles containing Sayuki The redirect is actgually unused in wikipedia. Lembit Staan (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's not a lot (Legend of Sayuki, Sayuki Takagi) but fair enough. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:13, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• dabify' per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:02, 9 March 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 boredom. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Tedious → Manual labour  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While manual labour is generally tedious, it is not the only sort of thing that is tedious. This redirect should be deleted. Soft redirect to wiktionary. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should it be redirected to monotonous then? I made the redirect when I couldn’t think of a good synonym for tedious. Dull? Boring? These are synonyms that would make sense to use. I will acknowledge that manual labor isn’t a very good redirect. Clamless (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Soft redirect to wiktionary? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Tedium is a redirect to boredom. That might work here, too. - Eureka Lott 19:15, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Soft redirect. This seems to meet the criteria for a soft redirect to wikt. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:12, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Soft redirect sounds like the best solution to me. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Boredom to match Tedium and to keep redirects local when possible. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:29, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Boredom: this is a common, everyday word, so it's very unlikely that a reader may type it here looking for the dictionary definition that will tell them what it means. On the other hand, it is a perfectly plausible search term for the article about tedium and boredom. – Uanfala (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Boredom per Tavix's findings --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Boredom per Uanfala. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:14, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not sure that tedious (or tedium for that matter) should redirect to the article about boredom as in my mind they represent two different things – those performing a tedious task don't necessarily find it boring. I prefer to keep redirects local but I don't think that the retarget proposed is the right solution. Weak soft retarget to wikt:tedious in lieu of a better solution. If this redirect is targeted to boredom, there's a fair bit about tedium in boredom#Philosophy so that is also a possible solution. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 01:35, 15 March 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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:55, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Gaarbage → Trojan (brand)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Looks like this may be old vandalism. Can't really find any connection between the phrase "gaarbage" and this brand of condoms. Looks like deletion is the best solution. Hog Farm _Talk 03:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Vandalism; no hits for search of exact spelling on Google. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete G3 left over redirect from some 2005 era page move vandalism. Page views are not high enough to indicate that this is a plausible misspelling of "Garbage". 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The title speaks of itself. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per above. It won't be a useful redirect to garbage. --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This redirect is just ga[a]rbage. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:16, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to garbage as such would be harmless. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 01:18, 15 March 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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Zirkouh County → Template:Zirkuh County  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to be a misspelling; unused; and unlikely to be useful as a redirect. Nothing links here. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Misspelled name of this county with no usage. Template was at this title for 2 weeks in 2013 before being moved to the correct spelling. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per below. A look at the page history plus a google search lead me to think this was either a typo or a french transliteration of the name, but if this is a valid English transliteration it should be kept. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep valid alternative transliteration, not misspelling. Lembit Staan (talk) 17:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• P.S. I strongly recommend to use google when making judgments about words in languages you do not know. 17:40, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
  • I kinda expected a valid alternative spelling to be in the article, if it existed. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Zirkouh is used less often than Zirkuh but appears to be a valid alternate transliteration of the Persian original. Even commons uses the alternate spelling for some files: e.g., "File:Zirkouh County.png" A quick google search will see that Zirkouh is used by some (a minority) to refer to the same place. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above; alt spelling and ((R from move)). — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 01:22, 15 March 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. Hog Farm _Talk 05:56, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Zodiac sign → Template:Infobox zodiac  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused; not in the naming conventions for an infobox-template at all; if anything I'd expect this to redirect to ((Zodiac)) (but there is really no reason for it to exist at all, in any form). Elli (talk | contribs) 02:34, 8 March 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. Hog Farm _Talk 05:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:ß template → Template:Template rating  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused; unlikely name for a redirect - if anything, you'd expect this to be a wrapper around ((Template rating)) to automatically mark the template as beta, but instead it is simply a redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If this was a β I could understand having the redirect as a wrapper for "beta template", but this uses the ß (Eszett) from German, which makes no sense. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 02:53, 8 March 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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:¬ → Template:Not  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Entirely pointless and unused redirect; ((¬)) just does the same as typing ¬ so there is no reason to do the former. A previous TfD established this should redirect to ((Not)) as opposed to (apparently) something to do with redirects, but the current use is pointless. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Typing ¬ produces the character ¬. Typing ((¬)) produces an underlying <math>\neg</math>, which on my system renders as an image: ${\displaystyle \neg }$. – Uanfala (talk) 03:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm. This still doesn't seem to me to be a good reason to keep this particular redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep seems like a sensible enough redirect to a template that produces a not symbol in math markup. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, seems harmless. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, it's a redirect from a symbol to a template that displays the symbol. That seems standard enough, unless I'm missing something. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 01:15, 15 March 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. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 14:54, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Gilthui → Middle-earth#Geography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Two issues here: First, there appears to be no content on enwiki about this obscure subject. Second, the correct spelling would be Glithui, which was deleted back in January 2020. Hog Farm _Talk 00:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: The Glithui was a tributary of the River Teiglin in Beleriand. I think the deletion was correct, so this one should also be deleted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:15, 8 March 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.