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.
Retarget per nom. I agree that the general overview article about LGBT is a more plausible destination for this than the subpage on LGBT rights in law. Bearcat (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2020 (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.
As redirects, there seems to be no appropriate place for these to target per WP:XY, given there is no appropriate information at Pokémon which these redirects could refer, and the titles of the redirects do not show exclusivity to Pokémon (anime), their current target which doesn't include such information either. The redirect Cultural references in Pokémon was previously an article which was deleted in 2006 per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cultural references in Pokémon (4th nomination), but then had its edit history restored in 2009. However, with all that being said, I am not seeing the content which was formerly at this title present in any Pokémon-related article, meaning the edit history should be safe to delete. Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Seventyfiveyears(talk) 22:46, 3 September 2020 (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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Seventyfiveyears(talk) 22:43, 3 September 2020 (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.
A Scholar search suggests that PLpro stands for "papain-like protease", which is not equivalent to papain itself. It's not mentioned at the target. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguilltalk21:26, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete to encourage article creation. It does seem to be a protease that's been researched significantly because it turns up in coronaviruses, and other related ones like 3CLpro have significant articles. I don't think it's necessarily harmful to point it at Papain as it is at the moment (as the article does explain the mechanism) but it's not really all that helpful either, and while it's mentioned in several coronavirus-related articles it's not really discussed usefully anywhere else to retarget. ~ mazcatalk12:31, 21 September 2020 (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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Seventyfiveyears(talk) 20:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Also, per WP:RGUIDE, unchallenged RfDs should be closed as delete after seven days, instead of being relisted. This rule strikes a balance between giving interested parties a fair chance to comment (as AfD does for articles) and allowing uncontroversial deletion proposals to proceed without overhead (similar to WP:PROD). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 23:53, 3 September 2020 (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.
Film-title-to-director redirect for a film that entered the production pipeline a decade ago but appears never to have come out the other end as a completed film, and is not mentioned in the target article at all. The more serious problem is that a completely different film of the same title, by a different director, premiered this year -- meaning that a person who wants to find the 2020 film will get badly confused and misled by this (in fact, there's already an inbound link expecting the 2020 film). If I could find evidence that the Shapiro film had ever actually come out at all, then I'd just move this to a new title that added the year of release to the disambiguator -- but I can't find any such evidence, so deletion is the more appropriate response. Bearcat (talk) 19:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As the nom suggests, this is ambiguous, and confusing without a mention. Without prejudice to its re-creation as an article about a future film. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:31, 5 September 2020 (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 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.
Various topics (probably works) that are not mentioned in the target article, leaving readers searching for these terms left with finding no such information. Steel1943 (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2020 (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 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.
Delete the "Untitled" one as it's plausible that title could be used for a future draft article about another sequel. Keep the rest as there is no benefit to deleting them - it is not plausible these will ever be needed for drafts about any other topic. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your "no benefit to deleting them" makes me think you spend very little time in draftspace maintenance, which depends heavily on Special:AllPages, a tool that has 1) no way to suppress display of redirects and 2) can only display 200 draftspace pages at a time. This means a draftspace maintainer has to scroll past page, after page, after PAGE, containing mostly redirects similar to the ones above, before finally reaching a draft page needing maintenance such as Draft:Gopi Einstein (The Scientist). UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a reason to develop alternative tools and/or improve the ones we currently have rather a justification for deleting redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 19:23, 26 August 2020 (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 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.
Spent a while looking through various locomotion articles, and can't find an appropriate extant target. In lieu of a page for wading being created (not sure what it'd contain beside from a definition, we could potentially add a new entry at Walking#Variants and redirect there? BlackholeWA (talk) 14:47, 5 September 2020 (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.
It is not. It's a redirect to Karger, because it's fairly standard practice to redirect lesser notable journals to their publishers. Headbomb {t · c · p · b}20:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Might feel differently if this were part of a well reasoned bulk nomination, or was testing consensus for same, but per Headbomb, makes no sense as a one-off delete. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:04, 4 September 2020 (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.
I created this redirect in 2018 as a replacement for a piped link in 2012 in film, in connection with the film Underworld: Awakening, which Len Wiseman directed - presumably in association with Sketch Films, who are mentioned in the film's article as a production company, though no explicit connection is made between the company and Mr Wiseman. Colonies Chris (talk) 15:44, 19 August 2020 (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.
Creation vs. mainstream science in cosmology[edit]
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 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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 21#BERSATU Blackout
