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) 16:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Other Characters in TUGS → List of Tugs characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Other Vessels in TUGS → List of Tugs characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirects' titles are not clear on what characters or vessels they are intended to exclude. Steel1943 (talk) 23:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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) 15:58, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Other New Albion ideas → Fringe theories on the location of New Albion  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect's title is not clear on what "New Albion ideas" it is meant to exclude. Steel1943 (talk) 23:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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) 15:58, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Star trek babies → Star Trek spin-off fiction  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect is not mentioned in its target article. Also, the redirect seems to have been a previous nomination for WP:VFD in 2006; it seemed that this subject lacked notability? Steel1943 (talk) 23:33, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete - the source cited in the previous discussion on this title to redirect it to "Star Trek, other storylines" (which now redirects to "Star Trek spin-off fiction" and is also nominated below) isn't reliable and I couldn't find anything relevant pertaining to this in a quick search.—Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 05:45, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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) 15:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Other Rangers and Ranger Allies → List of Power Rangers characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Other Rangers and Ranger-like allies → List of Power Rangers characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Other Rangers and Ranger-like Allies → List of Power Rangers characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Other Ranger → List of Power Rangers characters  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It is very unclear what these redirects are meant to exclude. (And, what is a "ranger-like ally"???) Also, "Other Ranger" is even more unclear since "ranger" is an ambiguous term. Steel1943 (talk) 19:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment These articles are what I dub "titles of convenience" when meant to describe the "Sixth Ranger" character in the various Power Rangers shows (for the Generation Y folks, that would be Tommy Oliver, the evil Green Ranger from MMPR). They're not meant to be exactly very search friendly. Kinda like how nobody would ever search Dictabelt evidence relating to the assassination of John F. Kennedy. So if they aren't actually articles anymore, then by all means, once all internal links are dealt with, they should be deleted. hbdragon88 (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Note that if you delete "titles of convenience" you break the historical versions of pages. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:11, 26 August 2015 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  

• Strong delete WP:BIAS/ambiguous. This is not the Power Rangers Wiki, there are many types of Ranger having nothing to do with Power Rangers, and they have allies, some of which are like Rangers. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:35, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Indeed Elladan and Elrohir for example. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:12, 26 August 2015 (UTC).Reply[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) 15:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Other Common Carrier → E-carrier  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect is unclear since it is not clear what it excludes. Also, the redirect is not mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 16:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete per nom. -©2015 Compassionate727^{(Talk)(Contributions)} 16:53, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer 17:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete - The term "common carrier" could refer to very different things, including an animal that's a carrier of diseases from one host to another as well as a company that provides mobile networking services. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would note that we do have an article on the legal/technical term "Common carrier", but then maybe the creation of a disambiguation article could be done. I'm not sure. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:19, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Cömment. I'm with CoffeWithMarkets that ad hoc without checking I seem to remeber that Other Common Carrier, in the UK, was used in the Telecommunications Act 1984 establishing British Telecom, the other Common Carrier being Kingston-upon-Hull Telecommuncations (now apparently part of KCOM Group, though the article is very vague on this, . Si Trew (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Retarget to Common carrier. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC).Reply[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) 15:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Real World Interface → iRobot  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete - the target article does not mention this technology, nor can I find any information about it. TB (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Retarget to Real life Delete per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 16:11, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, per search engines, it seems that this term has with some sort of connection with the subject at TARDIS, but the redirect is not mentioned there; however, the redirect is mentioned in related article The One Doctor. Also, Real World Interfaces seems to be some sort of company. Steel1943 (talk) 16:28, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer 17:20, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Redirect to the TARDIS page, given that the non-mention of the entrance to the TARDIS being called the "Real World Interface" is likely just a mere oversight that will be fixed soon. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:24, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Redirect to Human-Computer interaction, to which Human computer interface redirects, but not Human-computer interface nor human computer interaction all redirect. I haven't checked yet but I'll rtag those without prejudice, as usual. Si Trew (talk) 22:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete "real world" vs "cyberspace"/"theoretical"/"fictional"/etc , iRobot isn't the only thing with interfaces that exist in the real world. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:37, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This title is capitalised - I'd fully agree were the redirect from real world interface. - TB (talk) 07:53, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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) 15:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Other Arjunas → Arjun  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect is unclear on which "Arjunas" this is meant to exclude. (Side note: it seems that this redirect was formerly an article that looked like an attempt to make either a set index or disambiguation page, but it doesn't seem as though the content was merged anywhere.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Delete per nom. -©2015 Compassionate727^{(Talk)(Contributions)} 16:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer 17:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Keep - whatever other Arjuna the reader is looking for will be found at the target page. WilyD 09:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...Unless they are looking at Arjun, don't like the "Arjunas" they see there, and want to find other "Arjunas" ... and the get confused (and a bit disappointed) that they arrived back at Arjun. The reader is then disappointed that there are no other Arjunas. With this logic, it would be better for this redirect to be deleted so that the reader can allow Wikipedia's search function to help them find what they want to find. Steel1943 (talk) 15:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Keep per WilyD. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:15, 26 August 2015 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  
• Delete, this is nonsense. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:18, 26 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Delete - The use of "other" is confusing. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[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.