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 retarget to Bell character. I've redirected the page to Bell character and put a hatnote there which directs people to Bell (instrument) in case that's what they are looking for. After a question on my talk page, and upon rereading I can see that keeping the redirect as it was directing to the dab is a better outcome than my interpretation. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• 🔔 → Bell (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

Delete this worthless redirect from an unreadable glyph. Anomalocaris (talk) 23:44, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• keep. The character is U+1F514 'BELL', so the target is entirely logical. Is perfectly readable if you have a font that supports it (the XUBUNTU default ones do for example), so it is not unreadable. Finally, it was used 63 times in October and 90 times in both September and August so it is far from worthless. Thryduulf (talk) 01:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• 'keep but change the redirect to where it actually belongs, Bell character DGG ( talk ) 06:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment U+0007 BELL is the bell control character, and the current article Bell character only covers the control character, and its visual representation U+2407 SYMBOL FOR BELL. "U+1F514" is actually the graphical character of a bell, and not covered by that article. -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 06:42, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it's the unicode symbol for a bell, so should redirect to Bell ( Bell (disambiguation) ) -- 70.24.250.26 (talk) 06:42, 23 November 2012 (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). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (film) → The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: /delete ] 

Nominating for deletion. The target was initially created as a redirect to The Hobbit (film series) and was frequently updated with standalone content and redirected again. On 20 November 2012, a new article The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (film) was created without using the existing page. I have now merged the histories and think we don't need the leftover disambiguation "... (film)". The search term is already covered by the generic film title. De728631 (talk) 15:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and tag with {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, searching for the title of a film with a "(film)" disambiguator is almost always entirely plausible. I'll update the target to avoid the double redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 16:34, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• keep to stop any more articles being created at this title. Siuenti (talk) 21:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - plausible search term, redlinking clearly only encourages creation of a redundant article. WilyD 11:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep with the page as a redirect as stated above. Also I agree with Thryduulf's, suggestion of the template to add. -Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:23, 28 November 2012 (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.