The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was no consensus. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:RoundN → Module:RoundN  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused redirect and I find there is no reason to create this redirect, only just match module name. Hhkohh (talk) 19:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I was considering saying keep because redirects are cheap. However, I noticed that it is a cross-namespace redirect, and those are generally undesirable. ―NK1406 ^{talk•contribs} 02:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I just found Module:RoundN thanks to this redirect. I was trying to learn how Template:Round8 works; I saw ((#invoke:RoundN|main|columns=3)), and I wanted to see what that does; so I went to Template:RoundN, since I didn't know about modules. I wouldn't have found Module:RoundN if it hadn't been for the redirect. Joriki (talk) 23:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Template: to Module: redirects are normally harmless and, per Joriki, often helpful. There isn't a need to routinely create such redirects, but equally there isn't a need to delete them either. Thryduulf (talk) 02:30, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Joriki and Thryduulf: I did not find guideline which we must create these kind of redirect. If we input ((RoundN)), it will output error. Hhkohh (talk) 15:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just because there is no guideline saying something must be created does not mean that thing should be deleted if it is created. Read Joriki's comment explaining how this is a useful redirect - transclusion is the most common reason why redirects in the template namespace are useful but it is not the only one. Thryduulf (talk) 15:49, 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 keep. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Military First → Songun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not the common title. Probably refers to militarism, in a similar matter that [insert country name] first refers to nationalism. Aasim (talk) 03:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep every single one of the use of this exact term on Wikipedia (other than in the middle of sentences) is about North Korea, and in very nearly all of them it is used as a translation of "Songun". Google results at first glance don't include North Korea, but when you exclude first aid kits, first responders and first-person shooters it's clear that (other than more irrelevant mid-sentence results) there are only two contenders for primary topic - Songun, or militarism in the context of North Korea (i.e. Songun). After that comes a military policy card in Civilization VI (not mentioned on en.wp that I can find, likely WP:GAMECRUFT) and a military surplus store in Manchester (that is not notable). There is a single Council on Foreign Relations blog post about how "the military-first policy in Northern Mozambique is bound to fail", but searching on Wikipedia for "Military First" and "Mozambique" finds exactly two relevant uses: the first is the title of a reference at Reconnaissance General Bureau, a North Korean intelligence agency ("North Korean Civil-military Trends: Military-first Politics to a Point."); the second is at Foreign relations of North Korea#Principles and practice - "...while Article 59 [of the North Korean constitution] says the country's armed forces will "carry out the military-first revolutionary line.". Thryduulf (talk) 03:55, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Thryduulf. As a capitalized proper noun, it primarily refers to North Korea. MB 23:25, 10 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:22, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hungerleider → Robin Starveling  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Hungerleider is German for pauper. It appears that this redirect was created as a redirect from another language to Starveling, not realizing that that was a surname redirect to Robin Starveling. As paupers have no special affinity for the German language, redirecting to Pauperism would go against WP:RLOTE, and this redirect should just be deleted. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this redirect made sense before the content of Starveling was deleted. Now this forwarding has no more meaning, because the links in the article Starveling to Hungerleider and peoples named "Straveling" and "Hungerleider" have also been deleted and is now itself a forwarding to Robin Starveling. BR, Asurnipal (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: per Asurnipal's explanation. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:53, 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. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:22, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Secret Headquarters → Paramount Pictures  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target. Draft:Secret Headquarters exists and establishes that this is a planned film produced by Paramount, but it has yet to be listed at any article in mainspace, and a mention at Paramount Pictures doesn't seem due. If a mention of the upcoming film is added to an article redirecting there would be appropriate, but until then this should probably be deleted. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - There is no information about Secret Headquarters at the target nor should there be. -- Whpq (talk) 18:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Till then we can work on the draft. desmay (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: to encourage article creation (draft improvement). 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:54, 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 19:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Tessica Brown → Gorilla Glue#Lawsuits  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

this girl isn't notable - she said she wanted to sue Gorilla Glue but doesn't even have a case. I've removed the content from teh article as it's entirely irrelevant and just another internet fad that will quickly fade, as is she. CUPIDICAE💕 17:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This woman has no lasting impact on the article. Per the woman herself, she has no plans to sue the manufacturers. The lawsuit would be the only thing to add and barring her going back on her words and bringing this to court, there's zero reason to include this. It also poses a fairly large BLP issue because of the amount of apparent misinformation going around. I'd say speedy delete but I don't think that there are any speedy criteria that would cover this, as I don't think that this was added maliciously. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - textbook WP:NOT. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The incident isn’t mentioned at the article and based on other discussions it’s appears unlikely that it ever will be unless circumstances significantly change (ie she later does decides to sue).--65.92.160.124 (talk) 06:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – isn't (and shouldn't be) mentioned in the article; per WP:BLP this is not a valid redirect for the name of an individual. --bonadea contributions talk 21:40, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Separate I typed "Tessica Brown" into wikipedia just to find out what this story was about. I agree that she isn't relevant to Gorilla Glue and doesn't belong in that article. But I'd have found a stand-alone stub useful. Wikipedia is a good starting point for news that the media has moved on from. Everyone is doing 'updates' at this point that assume I know more than I do. Algr (talk) 01:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The issue is that a stand alone article would fail WP:BLP1E as she is an otherwise low profile individual without coverage outside this insignificant event. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not mentioned at target article and consensus at the article talk page is that she should not be included due to WP:BLP concerns. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:50, 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 keep. @IN: It is completely usual that shortcuts are potentially ambiguous, so this redirect should be uncontroversial unless somebody thinks a different target is clearly more likely to be abbreviated like that. (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:EY → Wikipedia:Enjoy yourself  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Because I found that the abbreviation of enjoy yourself is “EY”, so I create it. But I put it here to check if there are other articles where the abbreviation is also “EY”. Alcremie (talk) 16:41, 10 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 Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G6 - obviously created in error. Thryduulf (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Tempalte:West Santa Ana Branch → Template:West Santa Ana Branch  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This and this. Speedy delete as G6 as this redirect has a typo in template namespace and that it was unambiguously created in error. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 16:36, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy G6 per nom. Obviously meant to be created in the template namespace and moved after a couple of minutes. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:50, 10 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 disambiguate. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• COVID-20 → Coronavirus disease 2019  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Dispute over disambiguating with a link to Variant of Concern 202012/01 or redirect to the current target. Discussion attempted at this redirect's Talk page with no participation. The new COVID variant seems to be the only new thing that could be the reference to 20 since the last consensus here. Jalen Folf (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambig. Google results are showing a complete mix of uses for the COVID-19, the B1.1.7 varient, the second wave of the pandemic and a few other things that we probably don't have articles about (but I've not looked). Thryduulf (talk) 22:10, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambig. There is nothing officially titled "COVID-20" (with the possible exception of independent zombie survival game, more on this later), so disambiguation seems to be the appropriate path forward, as it allows the disambiguation page to indicate that the term itself is a misnomer, while providing links to both COVID-19 and whatever variants identified in 2020 that make sense. In the event the independent game is considered notable enough to get an article COVID-20 (game), the disambiguation page will be even more necessary. Bakkster Man (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambig per Thryduulf. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - too vague to be useful as a search term for any particular sub-topic. A reader using this as a search doesn't know what they're looking for, but they won't be disappointed by landing on the central COVID-19 article. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 13:29, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the redirect already takes readers to where they want to be, although neither of the possible dab links actually mentions the term "COVID-20". Sending readers and searchers to a dab page isn't helpful when we can send them directly to the relevant page, complete with links to individual variants if that's what they want to know about. Asking them to make a decision about two pages on essentially the same subject before they understand it is just confusing. The redirect target describes the disease COVID-19 while the suggested alternative target describes a virus variant, not the disease, although it would certainly be better if one or other article actually mentioned this particular term. It has been used formally by respectable scientific sources, so not just an invalid term as I thought at first. More generally, I don't get this obsession with creating dab pages with only two entries, especially when one is just a sub-section of the other broken out more for organisational reasons than anything else. Redirect readers to somewhere relevant instead of dumping them into a classification system created to keep WP editors happy. If and when there is an article about a game, or anything else, called COVID-20, then we can worry about whether it is remotely as popular as the disease term. There is always the option of COVID-20 (disambiguation) if we end up with multiple articles but still a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Lithopsian (talk) 14:19, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Have heard of no such thing called COVID-20, and even then I see it as much of an implausible search term as "COVID-21", "COVID-22", "COVID-23", etc. Plus, I am yet to see reliable sources use this term to refer to the variants of COVID-19. Aasim (talk) 06:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Awesome Aasim: I can see a reason for COVID-23 as a main part of the story of Songbird (film), but everything else... I can agree to. Jalen Folf (talk) 07:37, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Awesome Aasim: it doesn't matter whether it is used in reliable sources, what matters is whether people are looking for content using this term (which they clearly are) and what content they are looking for (google results show a mix of things, hence we should be disambiguating this). Thryduulf (talk) 13:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Distambig per all the above. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:26, 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 no consensus. Neither the deletion rationale nor the keep !vote are particularly strong arguments, I see no reason to relist this. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:25, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:FK → Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Fk is short for fuck, and I'm put it here first to check if FK has any other meaning in Wikipedia. Alcremie (talk) 16:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I don't think there is any other meaning. Aasim (talk) 06:38, 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 Number nine. Note that a discussion may be closed early after a relist if a consensus has been reached, which is the case here. Also, please don't retarget the redirect while the discussion is still going. (non-admin closure) — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 20:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• No. 9 → New Mexico No. 9  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"No .9" is too ambiguous to redirect to New Mexico No. 9, this should redirect to 9 (disambiguation). Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 15:23, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it should point to the disambiguation page. Whether or not the pepper should be included in that page is a whole other discussion. Kehkou (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to 9 (disambiguation) per nom, far too general a term to be targeting a specific type of pepper. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This could probably be a speedy retarget given the redirect's creator has endorsed the retarget. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:04, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget: per nominator. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Number nine, which is what this is actually referring to—not necessarily nine itself. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per Tavix. - Eureka Lott 03:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Number nine per Tavix. --Un assiolo (talk) 17:54, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retargeted page to Number nine as per consensus. Kehkou (talk) 13:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Number nine per Tavix. Thryduulf (talk) 17:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to DAB page Number nine, and tag as ((R from abbreviation)) and ((R from ambiguous term)). Narky Blert (talk)
• Retarget to Number nine per Tavix. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:04, 10 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 19:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I have carried out the requested history split for the three that were using their talk page as sandboxes and restored the talk page content. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:39, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• User talk:Wmur2000 → Tom Griffith  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• User talk:Creators Touch → Webserver directory index  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• User talk:Jcpasiec → African-American representation in Hollywood  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• User talk:Pianistra → Aglaia Koras  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

User talk pages are for communicating with a user, not reaching an article. If there is a CSD criterion that could apply, please tell me, as there are quite a few more of these redirects. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• The second redirect here was created by a spammer who would go on to write some kind of threat about hacking, so it can safely be deleted.

The other 3 are from people using their talk pages as sandboxes, so the resulting pages (Tom Griffith, African-American representation in Hollywood and Aglaia Koras) need a WP:HISTSPLIT with the talk page content being moved back to the talk page and the article content staying where it is. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete: per G6; I believe it is uncontroversial maintenance to delete redirects unintentionally created as the result of a page move. Aasim (talk) 06:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • So no histsplit is required? (please ping on reply) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:37, 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 speedily deleted by Athaenara (talk · contribs · logs) with summary G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page – If you wish to retrieve it, please see WP:REFUND. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 11:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

I don't know if this redirect is possible。 Alcremie (talk) 11:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. "IX" is a Greek-letter Christogram (Iesos Christos; I = iota, X = chi), not exclusive to any specific Christian tradition. Narky Blert (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The unicode character in this link is U+2168 : ROMAN NUMERAL NINE (Ⅸ is a redirect to 9). The Roman numeral nine isn't associated with Christianity, as far as I know. - Eureka Lott 19:27, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment WP:IX has just been deleted. Can someone please close this discussion? 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:21, 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. Discussion suggests that this is likely an independently notable topic. Until such an article is drafted, there is a weak consensus that deletion is preferable to the existing redirect. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:22, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Antiespaña → Black legend (Spain)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

the name of the redirect is too broad for the redirect to the Spanish Black legend to be pertinent. Veverve (talk) 19:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep in some form - based on es:Antiespaña, this is a significant concept (somewhat related to Spanish nationalism) which should certainly produce a subject for the reader that searches for it, I'm just not sure what that should be. The only English articles that have the word are the far-right Vox (political party) and its leader Rocío Monasterio, but it seems to be a concept that is fairly historic but started to be referred to by this name in the 19th century. Hispanophobia might be a good target (and also introduces the Black Legend) although that article is in need of globalization. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 20:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Should be a separate article Reading the Spanish entry, the concept of Antiespaña is a political concept which belongs to the Spanish right, and it is explicitly stated that it is different from the Black Legend (Spain) and Hispanophobia. Hispanophobia is an undeniable fact (though honest differences exist about its extent and expression) the Black Legend is debatable but a large number of neutral academic historians believe it has a basis in fact. Antiespaña is primarily an identification of Spain with a specific ideological vision of what Spain should be, and then signalling any criticism of that idea, or even diversion from it, as "Anti-Spanish". It should not therefore redirect to either Hispanophobia or Black Legend (Spain). Boynamedsue (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete I just don't see a good place to point this. WP:RLOTE is not an issue inasmuch as this is a Spanish term for one or more concepts associated with Spain, but we still need to ask what a reader searching this term on the English Wikipedia is looking for. Hispanophobia is probably my best guess if I had to pick one, but following Boynamedsue's comments, I think WP:REDLINK deletion is more called for. --BDD (talk) 17:03, 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. --BDD (talk) 16:59, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Elsie Lovelock → List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters#Hazbin Hotel principal characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is ambiguous. The actor also voice acted in other works like Meta Runner, and I cannot find a good target that best exemplifies this actor's notable work. Jalen Folf (talk) 03:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete to allow for uninhibited search results, as the first results the Wikipedia search engine turns up are all the various pieces of her work. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 10:49, 10 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 no consensus. Precisely which topics belong at the disambiguation page is beyond the scope of this discussion, and can be addressed by the usual procedures. --BDD (talk) 16:56, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Hamilton, California (disambiguation) → Hamilton  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is only one "Hamilton, California" at the dab page. Hamilton City, California was formerly known as Hamilton, but there is a hatnote at Hamilton, California pointing there, so this isn't needed. Hog Farm _Talk 16:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It doesn't help that Hamilton City, California was not listed at Hamilton: I added it. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate. I found these locations named Hamilton in California that might be suitable entries on a disambiguation page:

• Hamilton City, California
• Hamilton, California
• Hamilton Branch, California
• Hamilton Army Airfield
• Mount Hamilton (California)

There are also 3 Hamilton High schools in California, but I probably wouldn't include them in a DAB page:

• Hamilton High School (Anza, California)
• Hamilton Union High School
• Alexander Hamilton High School (Los Angeles)

86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and add '101's finds to the DAB page. Hamilton, California, Hamilton City, California and Mount Hamilton (California) at the very least are full title matches. Narky Blert (talk) 20:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Narky Blert. The existing Hamilton dab page is not so large that these various titles need to be split out to their own separate dab. Note that there are separate dabs for Hamilton County, Hamilton Township, Hamilton Beach, Hamilton Branch, and many others, and it's possible some of 86.23's findings would be more appropriate in those lists rather than this one. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 20:39, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The hatnote to Hamilton City, California is sufficient. None of the other partial title matches are ambiguous with "Hamilton, California". older ≠ wiser 11:39, 3 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. (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:31, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• That was some weird shit → Inauguration of Donald Trump#Inaugural address  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is apparently a quote from George W Bush ([1]), but isn't mentioned at the article except in a citation title. I would lean toward deletion, as this is an unlikely search term that may not be intended to find the current target. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:58, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. It is partially mentioned in the target section, the last sentence of the third paragraph "Former president George W. Bush reportedly referred to the speech as "some weird shit" after the ceremony concluded" 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:02, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Partially mentioned at target as I mentioned above, almost every google search result is related to George Bush's usage of the phrase and, surprisingly, the phrase "That was some weird shit" does not appear to be used anywhere else in the encyclopaedia. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:14, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep per 86.23. Doesn't seem a hugely likely search term, and if it were a shorter quote like "weird shit" or "some weird shit" I'd say it's too ambiguous, but it does seem like the full-sentence form is overwhelmingly associated with this instance. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 11:19, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per IP. This one keeps confusing me -- I keep thinking I already !voted and seeing I haven't. Regardless, as prior mentioned, this does seem quite strongly associated even if it's not the likeliest search.

Just noticed I forgot to sign this... Vaticidalprophet (talk) 11:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. W. may well have provided the most memorable epigraph for the entire Trump administration. older ≠ wiser 13:39, 11 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.