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 Deleted as WP:G7 ( non-admin closure) by 85.67.32.244 ( talk) 04:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Macapagal Avenue → Diosdado Macapagal Avenue  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Created by mistake, having confused this with Macapagal Boulevard. Please delete. TagaSanPedroAko ( talk) 21:39, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Speedy Delete per WP:G7, will tag the redirect shortly.-- 67.70.103.244 ( talk) 23:12, 5 October 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. wbm1058 ( talk) 14:42, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Deograves Asuncion → Deogracias Asuncion  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Misspelled name. Olympics.com of the IOC list the subject's name as "Deogracias". Hariboneagle927 ( talk) 02:28, 28 September 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep and rcat as being from an error; the page was at this title for over 6 years, so deletion is likely to break links. Hog Farm _Talk 18:43, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Certainly implausible as a typo or misnomer in a vaccuum. "Deograves Asuncion" -wikipedia only returns 25 results, most or all of which are still drawing from Wikipedia. That made me curious whether this error is in external sources, which could cause continue searching, or if it was "our bad". The archived sports-reference.com source does use this form, though his page on the successor site does not. Given this uncertainty and the lack of topics this could refer to, I lean weak keep. -- BDD ( talk) 21:25, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Slightly weak keep per Hog Farm and BDD. Although this isn't Asuncion's correct first name, this thing is still getting a decent number of pageviews per year, and we don't want to break links (plus, people may still think it's his name). Regards, SONIC ⁶⁷⁸ 22:51, 5 October 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 courtesy of Explicit, I gather as part of a mass-deletion. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 11:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• 𐓈 (former Unicode lowercase) → Osage script  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This page was created today as part of T219279. It has the same target as the form without the disambiguator. It is useless. Delete it, as was done for DŽ (former Unicode lowercase), Ƚ (former Unicode lowercase), and similar pages. Gorobay ( talk) 20:28, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• @ Gorobay: Before you nominate any more of these, please see User talk:Legoktm#(former Unicode lowercase). These can probably all be G6'd. I just haven't gotten around to checking the two criteria Lego mentioned for all of them. -- Tamzin ^{cetacean needed} (she/they) 20:33, 5 October 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 procedural close. Please see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection to request unprotection. -- BDD ( talk) 21:01, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• The centimeter to centimetre redirect is protected. I don't think this is necessary. Similar redirects like kilometer, meter, and liter are not protected. 2600:1700:E660:9D60:F18D:B6DF:3359:D0 ( talk) 17:59, 5 October 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 Salsabil (Quran). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:44, 13 October 2021 (UTC) reply

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

Makes no sense. -- 2001:16A2:E6A8:4000:D0B9:51DC:424F:3889 ( talk) 14:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Salsabil (Quran): the relevant content that pointed this redirect here in the first place was split back in July. Jalen Folf (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC) reply
• The topic is indeed mentioned at Salsabil (Quran), but the context at that article makes it sound like this is just a name for ginger. This is borne out by Quranic translations of that verse. I don't see a similar form at Ginger#Etymology, though there are three other uses of the word in the English Wikipedia, all also referring to ginger. A Wikisource text says this is where we get the ginger genus name Zingiber from, so this may pass the WP:RLOTE bar. We'll probably need a source and/or mention, though. -- BDD ( talk) 20:48, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to Salsabil (Quran) as the only article that provides the source of the word. The usages in Hapax legomenon as one of the Quranic hapax (how many are there?) and Metathesis (linguistics) are interesting. The citation at Economy of ancient Tamil country probably mentions more about the word, which can be added to Ginger#Etymology, but even then, I'm not sure if Ginger can be the primary target. Should the word for ginger in potentially all languages of the world, redirect to Ginger? Jay ^(Talk) 20:56, 5 October 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. ✗ plicit 13:07, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Template:Reimprove → Template:More citations needed  ( talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

{{ R from misspelling}} is only an appropriate rationale for articlespace. For templates, it leads to confusion down the line, as people will wonder why a misspelled template still works (and possibly continue to use it). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) ( talk) 09:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nom. Someone will need to use AWB to replace the transclusions with the correct title. dud hhr _Contribs 14:20, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Replace and delete - shouldn't be a terribly complicated AWB job. Ivanvector's squirrel ( ^trees/ _nuts) 17:08, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Delete: This is an implausible search term. ― Susmuffin  ^Talk 17:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Replace and delete per User:Ivanvector, currently there are 369 transclusions. 85.67.32.244 ( talk) 01:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC) reply

  Now there are 0 transclusions. Ivanvector ( ^Talk/ _Edits) 11:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Nice work! 85.67.32.244 ( talk) 16:54, 10 October 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 Computers and Typesetting. (non-admin closure) feminist (+) 04:00, 12 October 2021 (UTC) reply

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

The current target only has a passing mention in the "Pronunciation and spelling" section; if the target is retained, it should be refined to that, though I suggest that Donald Knuth#Literate programming presents more information on this subject. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 00:03, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

I noticed a link to this discussion at Talk:TeX, but I don't understand: What is being discussed here? Is it about whether The TeXbook should be expanded into an independent article about the book, rather than being a redirect? Or is it about whether the redirect should exist at all? If it's the latter, what's the problem / what's the reason for considering deleting it? Shreevatsa ( talk) 01:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Shreevatsa I suggested changing the redirects' targets. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 12:15, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Retarget both per nom. I think the book is notable in its own right (and so the Rs could be {{ R with possibilities}}, but I doubt an article could say much beyond what is already said at Donald Knuth § Literate programming. I'm wondering whether TeX and WEB together constitute a self-reproducing program. 85.67.32.244 ( talk) 09:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Computers_and_Typesetting a five book series by Knuth of which this book is a part. This is a more focused target on the books themselves rather than their content or author. The article itself is stubby, but I have little doubt there are sufficient book reviews of these over the years to warrant a standalone article. --{{u| Mark viking}} { Talk} 18:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC) reply

  @ Mark viking, thanks for noting this. I suggest redirecting the other volume titles there as well then. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 ( talk) 22:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Retarget both per User:Mark viking. 85.67.32.244 ( talk) 02:48, 8 October 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.