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 00:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• IOS 17 → IOS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Per WP:CRYSTAL. iOS 17 is not announced yet. Hajoon0102 💬 23:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: iOS 16 is only currently in preview. While it certainly will exist, it doesn't yet. TartarTorte 15:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a crystal-clear case of crystal balling. This phone will almost certainly exist, but we shouldn't have redirects for models that haven't been announced or discussed in reputable sources yet. Recreate when Apple announces this model. Glades12 (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: "Not crystal ball". —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 04:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete iOS 17 hasn't been announced by Apple right now, if they announced it, then this should be not deleted. StaleGuy22 (talk) 15:44, 30 August 2022 (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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can . ✗plicit 00:40, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Album cover tag → Template:Non-free use rationale album cover  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Unnecessary WP:XNR with no incoming links and created by a banned user. Steel1943 (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2022 (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 00:39, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Shrek 5 Confirmed → Shrek (franchise)#Future films  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

I find it unlikely that someone would type "Shrek 5 Confirmed" to find the page for Shrek 5. Liliana ^(UwU) 21:57, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – example of enthusiastic fandom rather than encyclopedic value. TNstingray (talk) 01:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and TNstingray. Shrek 5 has been confirmed, but I'm not sure this is really a plausible title because it reads more like a news headline. It's also the only "[film] confirmed" redirect on Wikipedia. Regards, SONIC678 22:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is what a fandom user would type instead of a person that visits an encylopedia all the time. StaleGuy22 (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for not being a plausible search term. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unencyclopedic and not a noteworthy phrase outside the Shrek fanbase and meme culture (those overlap, of course). Glades12 (talk) 10:04, 3 September 2022 (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 14:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Closure of the map → Temporary Autonomous Zone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This term is not mentioned at the target. Google results show that the term is used in the book, but it is not the only use (e.g. there appears to be something related to a mathematical function that I don't understand, maybe related to closure (mathematics) or closure (topology)?) and it doesn't appear to be particularly prominent. I suggest deletion unless content is added somewhere. Thryduulf (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom czar 11:55, 29 August 2022 (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 restored list. Without prejudice to AfD. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• List of British dark comedies → Category:British black comedy television shows  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This cross-namespace redirect promises a list article, but the category is actually an incomplete list of articles in an ill-defined genre. There is no list on Enwiki of British dark comedies, and neither British comedy nor Black comedy are suitable targets, so delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert to list without prejudice to AfD per BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore list without prejudice against AfDing it per Thryduulf. As this is a {{R with history}} that's not trivial, this course if action would fulfill the promise like it did before it was BLARed back in 2016. Regards, SONIC678 16:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore list per WP:CLN, categories and lists should not be confused with one another. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:12, 29 August 2022 (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.