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. As a recently created misspelling. Jay (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Rolller hop → Carhop  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No articles link to redirect. Created by user who has a nine-page talk page archive of notices for deletion of redirects, categories and orphaned images, the majority of which have been removed. AldezD (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Delete Misspelling created two months ago. Paradoctor (talk) 02:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @AldezD: not being linked to is not a reason to deleted a redirect as they can and are used in other ways. Nor is the user who created them (except in some of the criteria for speedy deletion). It would be helpful if you gave more specific rationale in your nominations. As for this one, note that the correct spelling roller hop is currently a redlink. A7V2 (talk) 03:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the clue, I hadn't noticed the misspelling. 😅 Paradoctor (talk) 03:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as misspelling of a page that does not exist. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2022 (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 Particle-beam weapon. Jay (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Proton cannon → Proton pack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No articles link to redirect. Created by user who has a nine-page talk page archive of notices for deletion of redirects, categories and orphaned images, the majority of which have been removed. AldezD (talk) 19:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to particle-beam weapon Generic science fiction device used in the Marvel universe, Star Wars (Battle of Hoth), Ghostbusters, Transformers, Stephen R. Donaldson's Gap Cycle, and a gaggle of games. Paradoctor (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Paradoctor to particle-beam weapon ; as a topic of research in the Strategic Defense Initiative and other U.S. military projects -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 13:35, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per previous 2 replies. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 17:31, 22 February 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:37, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• QAaron → Aaron Rodgers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target (nor is QAnon), internet search does not suggest that this term is a common nickname. Delete unless a justification can be provided, such as evidence of use in RS. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G3. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral I don't really care, but at least some reliable sources discuss the name: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/12/from-brady-to-djokovic-aaron-rodgers-is-not-the-first-athlete-to-dabble-in-quackery, https://www.mediaite.com/sports/nfl-fans-mock-aaron-rodgers-as-throw-rogan-after-49ers-cancel-him-from-the-playoffs/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taltos (talk • contribs) 19:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete BLP concerns and not widely reported. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:34, 22 February 2022 (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. Withdrawn. Hog Farm _Talk 21:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suggest retargeting to Rapture, as that appears to be the primary topic here. Hog Farm _Talk 18:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Support No clear WP:primarytopic apparent. Keep The rapture article describes different kinds of rapture, and consistently uses lowercase, so "rapture" is not the primary topic for the proper noun "The Rapture". Paradoctor (talk) 18:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Paradoctor: Unless I'm mistaken Hog Farm is suggesting changing the target from the disambiguation page to rapture as they feel there is a primary topic, so it's not clear what you mean here? A7V2 (talk) 03:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@A7V2: Waaah! You're right, I crossed my axons there. Paradoctor (talk) 04:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per Paradoctor -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 13:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. No WP:PTOPIC or WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, therefore the DAB page is the best target. This will also minimise the frequency with which Rapture collects bad inlinks. Narky Blert (talk) 15:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Hog Farm, do you wish to withdraw, or do you want to add a justification to your nomination of rapture as the primary topic? Jay (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eh, I'll just withdraw. I still think it is, but consensus is clearly against me. Hog Farm _Talk 21:18, 28 February 2022 (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 Procedural close noting that the DRV is currently leaning towards deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 02:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Laodice (wife of Mithridates II of Commagene) → Mithridates II of Commagene  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Discussion following my closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laodice (wife of Mithridates II of Commagene) as "redirect" has made clear that Mithridates II of Commagene had no wife called Laodice, and that the article that suggested the contrary resulted from a misreading of a source (see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 February 18). The redirect therefore makes no sense and should be deleted. Sandstein 17:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an error; we might as well speedy this one. Hog Farm _Talk 18:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my comments at the AfD. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• No. Overturn the blatant and irresponsible supervote at the AFD, which DRV is perfectly competent to do, and speedy close this. —Cryptic 23:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Straight to DRV, and do not pass go This is kind of a scarily mistaken close from someone who's been an admin for more then 15 years.. We all make mistakes, but I hope this doesn't become a pattern. casualdejekyll 23:18, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Overturn the obvious AfD supervote and speedy close this, lest it establishes a bad precedent. Avilich (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• This should get deleted per the AfD, but let's not have parallel discussions: that should be sorted out by the DRV, which is set to run for two more days. – Uanfala (talk) 14:27, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural close as a case of Nomination is an immediate objection to a prior deletion outcome, more appropriate for deletion review. Although the AfD closer and the nom are the same, the nomination was voluntarily made on behalf of the DRV filer, while the DRV was in progress. Jay (talk) 06:09, 1 March 2022 (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. ✗plicit 00:36, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Frequency and pragmatically unmarked word order → Matthew Dryer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. It seems to be a paper by the target, but it's not notable and without being covered in the article at all is confusing. TartarTorte 16:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Not a helpful redirect. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2022 (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 01:56, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Basketball at the 2024 Summer Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Weightlifting at the 2024 Summer Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Football at the 2024 Summer Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These appear to be the only redirects for an Olympics sport to the main page, I'd suggest per WP:CRYSTALBALL that the redirects for an event happening in two years to the main event are not particularly useful. I would suggest either Delete or Redirect to Basketball at the Summer Olympics, Weightlifting at the Summer Olympics, and Football at the Summer Olympics. Bonoahx (talk) 16:24, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete at least the weightlifting one, the article for which sport doesn't even mention the years. The other two do mention the years, but don't describe them in detail. Regards, SONIC678 19:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Too early for these redirects. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirects - for all the events at the 2024 Paris' Summer Games. Now that the 2022 Beijing Winter Games are over. GoodDay (talk) 23:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 16:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. All they do is provide misleading bluelinks. There is no information about these events yet. A7V2 (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 20#Field hockey at the 2024 Summer Olympics. Unlikely search terms now, articles will be created later anyway. eviolite (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Not Your Love → That Sounds Good to Me  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to have been a working title for the song based on edit history, however I cannot find any reference to this in the article or related articles (e.g. United Kingdom in the Eurovision Song Contest); seems unlikely that reader searching for this term would be looking for this article Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Seems like a stretch that someone would use that search term to find this article, given that it was not really used to begin with. Grk1011 (talk) 17:52, 22 February 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• PKL Group → Queen's Awards for Enterprise  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

One of the 135 companies briefly mentioned at The Queen's Award for Enterprise: International Trade (Export) (2009), but that sort of list entry falls below the content threshold for which we provide navigation via redirects. – Uanfala (talk) 15:38, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, potentially per WP:SOAPBOX after having a look at the now-blocked redirect creator's talk page. Bonoahx (talk) 16:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC) (updated 00:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC))[reply]

• Delete: Zero mention/coverage at target; it's the same reason FlyingKitty was deleted. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Non-notable company. AKK700 01:47, 24 February 2022 (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 Weightlifting. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:08, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• 🏋 → Olympic weightlifting  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Suggest retarget to Weightlifting. It seems plausible to suggest this emoji could mean Weight training, Bodybuilding or Olympic weightlifting, as opposed to only the latter, and the dab page covers those. Bonoahx (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:XY, not mentioned anywhere. If anything, this should point to Emoji 1.0 or something in that weight class. Support, per Unicode documentation. Paradoctor (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Emojis are generally targeted towards the article that they represent, if it's clear what the emoji represents, per WP:REMOJI. Bonoahx (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You listed several different meanings yourself. Luckily, it turns out you were wrong about that. The symbol means "WEIGHT LIFTER"^[1], so your proposal was right, if for the wrong reason. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 21:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Cool, thanks Bonoahx (talk) 23:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak retarget to Weightlifting (which should be a WP:DABCONCEPT) per nom. I doubt many readers use emojis to search Wikipedia, though, so I don't care much where this goes or if it's deleted. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget' to Weightlifting per Paradoctor. All individual unicode characters outside the private use area are plausible search terms and should be blue links if there is an article about the character or what it represents. Thryduulf (talk) 22:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• I find it interesting to point out that weight lifter, the official name of the emoji, does redirect to Olympic weightlifting. I guess it's because someone who partakes in e.g. powerlifting would just be called a powerlifter instead, but it's something to think about. In any case, this emoji could reasonably be taken to represent the simple action of lifting weights, rather than a specific athlete, so I agree with retarget, though weakly. eviolite (talk) 04:21, 28 February 2022 (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! 05:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Timeline of the Ukrainian crisis → Ukrainian crisis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete unuseful redirect to a dabpage. Thesmp (talk) 14:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Why do you see it as unuseful? Jay (talk) 20:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, given that we can't be certain which crisis the searcher is thinking of and all the entries on the dab page have dates I don't think we can do better than this (and search results definitely would not be better). Thryduulf (talk) 20:39, 28 February 2022 (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. To keep the edit history of the four redirects that have been flagged as having significant history, I am performing history merges. Once the edit history is moved off these redirects, I no longer see a barrier for deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Çiyni (40° 32' N 47° 35' E), Ujar → Çiyni, Ujar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ciyni (40° 32' N 47° 35' E) → Çiyni, Ujar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Çiyni (40° 32' N 47° 35' E) → Çiyni, Ujar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ciyni (40° 32' N 47° 35' E), Ujar → Çiyni, Ujar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Təzəkənd (40° 18' N 47° 07' E), Tartar → Təzəkənd, Tartar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Tezekend (40° 18' N 47° 07' E), Tartar → Təzəkənd, Tartar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Qışlaq (39° 36' N 46° 43' E), Lachin → Qışlaq, Lachin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Qışlaq (39° 39' N 46° 26' E), Lachin → Qışlaq, Lachin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Qislaq (39° 36' N 46° 43' E), Lachin → Qışlaq, Lachin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Təzəkənd (40° 23' N 46° 54' E), Tartar → Ağkənd, Tartar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Tezekend (40° 23' N 46° 54' E), Tartar → Ağkənd, Tartar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Useless redirect pages, target articles already have the coordinates and it's inplausible that anyone will search these redirects. Also, alternate spellings of the names have independent redirects, thus no information will be lost by deleting these redirects - Kevo³²⁷ (talk) 13:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I took the liberty of tagging the pages that weren't properly tagged, so hopefully that'll help. Regards, SONIC678 16:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Çiyni (40° 32' N 47° 35' E), Ujar, Təzəkənd (40° 18' N 47° 07' E), Tartar, Qışlaq (39° 36' N 46° 43' E), Lachin, Təzəkənd (40° 23' N 46° 54' E), Tartar, and tag with ((R with history)). No opinion on the rest. ✗plicit 14:55, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The target articles were improperly created by copy/paste by Kevo327 back in June 2021. However, all content is trivial (apparently created by unauthorized bot by Carlossuarez46), and the only prose amounts to "X is a village in Y district of Azerbaijan". So, the best course of action is to WP:PAGESWAP to preserve history, then delete the implausible redirects. No such user (talk) 09:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @No such user: Sorry, which c&p moves are you referring to? I'm not seeing any in the histories of the four targets listed. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 04:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Tamzin: I spot-checked Qışlaq, Lachin so I presumed that was the case with the others. Actually, Çiyni [1] and Təzəkənd [2] were converted from dab pages, and Ağkənd created from scratch [3] in 2016 by Parishan. In all of those cases, I suppose copy/paste/modify technique was involved, (no wrongdoing implied, I do that myself with such boilerplate stubs) and the original articles IMO fell short of the "threshold of originality" (apparently having been created from a template), so I'd recommend pure delete of those redirects instead – there's no history worth preserving. No such user (talk) 08:17, 3 March 2022 (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 the first and keep the second. Despite the lack of participation, both the nom and the lone participant agree that both redirects should point to the same target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Beckton Riverside station → Docklands Light Railway extension to Dagenham Dock  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Beckton Riverside DLR station → Docklands Light Railway extension to Thamesmead  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These should target the same article. There is a little more information in the former, but the Dagenham Dock extension is an proposal that almost definitely will not be happening, while the Thamesmead extension is a proposal that is not going to progress in the short term and may or may not in the long term. Beckton Riverside is currently a redirect (nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 4#Beckton Riverside) to Beckton, but neither that article nor any other I've found contains any significant information about the development or either proposed station, let alone both. Thryduulf (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - they should target the Thamesmead extension given current plans. I'll leave my comments for Beckton Riverside area shortly. Turini2 (talk) 19:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:30, 21 February 2022 (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. Test page, author also requested deletion. Lenticel ^(talk) 01:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Eighty Years' War/Test → Eighty Years' War  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, not needed anymore. Thesmp (talk) 04:51, 21 February 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 03:52, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Soumen Sikdar → Presidency University, Kolkata  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Person not mentioned at target, or anywhere else. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete He seems to be a faculty at the University's Department of Economics. I don't think the redirect warrants a mention in the target article. --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:42, 22 February 2022 (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 Hrvoje Čale. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:49, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Čale → Ana Brnabić  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nonsensic redirect. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:46, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Hrvoje Čale and tag as R from surname --Lenticel ^(talk) 11:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete --Vacant0 (talk) 12:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Cale (name) - Hrvoje Čale is on that list too. --Bonoahx (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'm fine with this too. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:39, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Potentially with hat note stating that “Čale redirect here. For the former Croatian footballer...” if it is not against the MoS to list Hrvoje twice. NotReallySoroka (talk) 22:45, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The redirect creator had added this as a nickname at the target, and it was shortly removed as not funny. Jay (talk) 08:04, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Struck off vote seeing the support for non-deletion. Jay (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Hrvoje Čale and tag as ((R from surname)) as they are the only person with this name we have any content about I can find. A hatnote to Cale (name) can be added if desired (I'm neutral on that). Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Cale (name) which is more future-proof than Hrvoje Čale. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment if this points to Cale (disambiguation), that would also future proof it further. Add "Čale" to the description at the Cale (name) entry -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Hrvoje Čale, the sole surname-bearer. And it is not a common surname, so there is no pressing need to be "future-proof". I will move Hrvoje's entry at Cale (surname) from the list proper to "See also" section, his surname is neither pronounced like, nor etymologically connected, with the English one. (By the way, "Čale" is an obscure derogatory nickname for the Serbian PM, and the current redirect is a borderline BLP vio). No such user (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Hrvoje Čale per No such user - nobody else on the list has a caron on the C and do not seem etymologically related. eviolite (talk) 22:58, 1 March 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 03:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Football at the 2028 Summer Olympics – Men's tournament → Football at the Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per WP:CRYSTALBALL as per other RfD, suggest Delete. Bonoahx (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. A7V2 (talk) 03:28, 22 February 2022 (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. Jay (talk) 03:48, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• United States at the 2028 Summer Olympics → 2028 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per WP:CRYSTALBALL, it doesn't seem useful to have a redirect to the main page of an event happening in six years. Suggesting deletion. Bonoahx (talk) 00:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. A7V2 (talk) 03:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:TOOSOON - it doesn't require a crystal ball to know that the United States will be participating in an event it is hosting, but we don't have any useful content at the current target, United States at the Olympics, or anywhere else I can find. Thryduulf (talk) 22:59, 26 February 2022 (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.